Case 2300004/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs B Karagil v Alliance Dental Care Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 2300004/2023
- Decision date
- 3 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Evans Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs B Karagil
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 3 March 2025, Employment Judge Evans dismissed Mrs B Karagil's claim against Alliance Dental Care Limited because the tribunal lacked jurisdiction. A preliminary judgment sent to the parties on 18 February 2025 had concluded that she was neither an employee of the respondent nor a worker within section 230(3)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The claimant had indicated an intention to appeal and applied for the proceedings to be stayed pending any appeal. Her solicitor confirmed that no reconsideration application had been made and accepted that, subject to a successful appeal, the preliminary judgment brought the claim to an end. She raised concerns about whether dismissal would affect the claimant's ability to pursue the claim or obtain a remedy following a successful appeal. The judge explained that dismissal at this stage would make no difference to either, and the respondent's counsel agreed.
Following the respondent's oral application for dismissal, the parties agreed that the claim should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The tribunal also vacated the preliminary hearing listed for 1 April 2025 and the final hearing listed for 6–10 and 13–15 May 2025. The judgment records no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the individual causes of action. It dismisses the whole claim for lack of jurisdiction following the preliminary ruling on employee and worker status, without determining the substantive merits. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Section 230(3)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (worker status, as determined in the preliminary judgment)
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.