Case 2207284/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M Bailey v Nest Seekers Europe Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2207284/2021
- Decision date
- 1 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Joffe Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms M Bailey
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Ms M Bailey, brought claims against Nest Seekers Europe Limited. The hearing took place at London Central by Cloud Video Platform on 1 August 2022 before Employment Judge Joffe, with the claimant appearing in person and no appearance or representation for the respondent.
The tribunal found that the claimant was not an employee or worker of the respondent within the meaning of section 230 Employment Rights Act 1996. It also found that she was not an employee of the respondent within the meaning of section 83(2) Equality Act 2010. On that basis, the tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the claimant’s race discrimination claim, her sex discrimination claim, or her claim of automatic unfair dismissal under section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996.
All of those claims were dismissed. The judgment records that oral reasons were given at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the judgment being sent to the parties. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The tribunal held it did not have jurisdiction to hear the race discrimination claim because the claimant was not an employee within the meaning of section 83(2) Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Sex discrimination | The tribunal held it did not have jurisdiction to hear the sex discrimination claim because the claimant was not an employee within the meaning of section 83(2) Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment describes this as a claim of automatic unfair dismissal under section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996 and states that the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.230 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.83(2) Equality Act 2010
- s.103A Employment Rights Act 1996
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.