Dr N Couvaras v The Fine Clinic Limited — 2021

This was a preliminary judgment on employment status and strike-out/deposit issues. Dr N Couvaras had worked as a diet doctor at The Fine Clinic from August or September 2015. There was no written contract. The tribunal found that she worked regular mornings, was paid an hourly rate, invoiced the respondent, used the clinic's equipment, provided her own professional indemnity insurance, and described herself on invoices as self-employed. It accepted that the respondent's directors intended to engage her as an independent contractor and held that she was not an employee, although she was a worker.

On that basis the tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal, redundancy pay and notice pay claims, because those claims depended on employee status. It held that she could, however, continue with claims as a worker, including holiday pay and sick pay claims. The reasons record that she could pursue an unauthorised deduction from wages claim relating to holiday pay and sick pay, and any holiday pay claim under the Working Time Regulations.

The whistleblowing claim was not struck out. The tribunal said the disputed facts should be decided by a full tribunal and considered that the alleged disclosures could amount to qualified protected disclosures. It nevertheless found, on the evidence before it, that the claim had little reasonable prospect of success because there was no direct evidence that Dr V knew of the CQC and GMC complaints and because the respondent had a plausible explanation for reducing hours and ending the engagement during the pandemic. The tribunal made no factual finding on the disputed 15 February 2020 allegations and imposed a £50 deposit order if the claimant wished to continue that claim.