Case 2300031/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms W Lye v Maidstone Health Foods Limited ( In Liquidation ) and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 2300031/2024
- Decision date
- 16 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McLaren Representation
- Venue
- London South Hearing Centre
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Ms W Lye
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at London South Hearing Centre by CVP on 25 November 2024 before Employment Judge McLaren. The claimant appeared in person and the second respondent was represented by a lay representative.
The tribunal's judgment was that the claimant was not an employee. On that basis, the tribunal held that her claims did not succeed. The written record does not provide further reasons because reasons were given orally and written reasons would only be provided if requested within the applicable time limit.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claimant was not an employee and that her claims therefore did not succeed. The specific claim labels are taken from the listing categories supplied with the judgment text. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | The judgment states that the claimant was not an employee and that her claims therefore did not succeed. The specific claim labels are taken from the listing categories supplied with the judgment text. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the claimant was not an employee and that her claims therefore did not succeed. The specific claim labels are taken from the listing categories supplied with the judgment text. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment states that the claimant was not an employee and that her claims therefore did not succeed. The specific claim labels are taken from the listing categories supplied with the judgment 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.