In person For the v Ms E Stiles, Director — 2023

The claimant brought claims arising from work she said she performed for a remote, home-based recruitment role between 11 July 2022 and 8 August 2022. She said she had been promised pay at £24,000 per year, was asked to pay £72 for a DBS check, was promised £2 per day for office expenses, and was not paid her salary, notice pay, or expenses. The tribunal heard oral evidence from the claimant and Dr Stiles and had no bundle or witness statements.

The central issue was whether Applemire Ltd was the correct respondent. The tribunal found that the contract signed by the claimant named "Applemire International" as employer, not Applemire Ltd. Companies House records did not show a company called Applemire International, and the evidence accepted by the tribunal was that Dr Stiles and Applemire Ltd had never employed the claimant and had no connection with the London addresses used in the proceedings. The tribunal therefore held that Applemire Ltd was not the correct respondent and dismissed the claims against it.

The tribunal accepted that it was not right that the claimant carried out work and was not paid, but it made no finding against Applemire Ltd on that basis because the legal respondent was wrong. It also noted that the claimant accepted she had never worked for Dr Stiles or her company, and that there might be rights in another forum. The tribunal made no finding as to any criminal activity.

The unfair dismissal claim failed in any event because the claimant accepted she had less than two years' service. No monetary award was made.