Case 2200173/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr I Kirkham v London Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and 1 other — 2020
- Case reference
- 2200173/2019
- Decision date
- 1 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr I Kirkham
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing held at London Central on 1 December 2020 before Employment Judge A M Snelson, the Respondents were represented by counsel and there was no appearance or representation for the Claimant. The Tribunal first held, in case no. 2200173/2019, that the proper Respondents were those named in the title and that the Claimant was not an employee or worker of either Respondent.
In claim no. 2202009/2019, the Tribunal held that the Claimant was not a worker of either Respondent for the purposes of the Employment Rights Act 1996, s47K. On that basis, and because the preliminary issues were decided against the Claimant, the Tribunal concluded that it had no jurisdiction to consider the claims and dismissed them. No monetary remedy was awarded or addressed in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Preliminary jurisdictional ruling only; the Tribunal held that the Claimant was not an employee or worker of either Respondent and therefore had no jurisdiction to consider the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Preliminary jurisdictional ruling only; the judgment states that the Claimant was not a worker of either Respondent for the purposes of the Employment Rights Act 1996, s47K, but does not state the underlying substantive claim label in the extracted text. | Dismissed | — | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.