Case 2301235/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Fratrikova v Secretary of State for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy — 2022
- Case reference
- 2301235/2022
- Decision date
- 8 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Robinson Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Fratrikova
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant set up Dankayo Limited after being told by Hays that she needed to operate through a limited company to carry out Executive Assistant consultancy work. She was the sole director and shareholder, carried out all of the Company's work herself, and paid herself a monthly salary with the remainder of the Company's receipts taken as dividends.
The Tribunal considered whether there was an express or implied contract of employment between the Claimant and the Company. There was no written contract. Applying Ready Mixed Concrete and considering Neufeld, the Tribunal found that personal service was present but that there was no genuine element of control, and that the overall arrangements pointed away from employment.
The Tribunal concluded that the Claimant had not been an employee of the Company. Her claims for redundancy pay, holiday pay, arrears of pay and notice pay were therefore dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Dismissed because the Tribunal found the Claimant was not an employee and had no contract of employment with the Company. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Dismissed because the Tribunal found the Claimant was not an employee and had no contract of employment with the Company. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim was described as arrears of pay and dismissed because the Tribunal found the Claimant was not an employee and had no contract of employment with the Company. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The claim was described as notice pay and dismissed because the Tribunal found the Claimant was not an employee and had no contract of employment with the Company. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £0
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
6 references- Ready Mixed Concrete threefold test
- Secretary of State for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform v Neufeld and Howe
- s.166 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.182 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.184 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.230 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.