In person For the v Respondent — 2020

At a preliminary hearing in public in Leeds on 19 August 2020, Employment Judge Davies held that Mr L Mbuisa was not an employee of Care AK Ltd trading as Kare Plus Huddersfield within s.230(1) and (2) Employment Rights Act 1996. The judge found that the written terms and the parties' practice did not create mutuality of obligation: Kare Plus Huddersfield would endeavour to find work, the claimant could accept or refuse shifts, and the documents and text messages showed that he sometimes did both. On that basis, the tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal and breach of contract claims for want of jurisdiction, and also said the claimant could not bring a claim for notice pay.

The tribunal also determined the disability preliminary issue in the claimant's favour. It found that, during the relevant period, he had a physical impairment (back pain) and a mental impairment (depression and anxiety), and that each had a more than minor or trivial adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities that had lasted more than 12 months. The judge accepted the claimant's oral evidence about his medication and its effect, approached some medical records with caution, and concluded that the Equality Act 2010 definition of disability was met for both conditions.