Case 2302035/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss T Scott v CYC Coastal Club Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2302035/2023
- Decision date
- 29 November 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dyal Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss T Scott
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt this preliminary hearing on 29 November 2023, Employment Judge Dyal considered whether the Respondent's committee had authority to bind the company after the 12-month term in article 10(2) had passed without resignation, election of a new committee, or an AGM. The tribunal rejected the Respondent's construction of the Articles of Association, holding that the committee continued to hold the powers in article 11 until it resigned or was otherwise removed, and that the pandemic explained the absence of an AGM in 2020.
The tribunal then rejected the submission that the claimant's two written agreements were a sham or were not contracts of employment. It found that the claimant genuinely began paid work on 1 June 2020 as Site Manager/Administrator, and that a second agreement signed in June 2021 reflected additional bookkeeping duties from 1 October 2020 at an extra £65 for four hours per week. The tribunal accepted that she performed the duties personally, took instructions from Mr Davies and the committee, had no contractual right of substitution, and was paid through PAYE with payslips and auto-enrolment, all of which pointed to employment.
The tribunal also refused the Respondent's application for a deposit order. It said that, on the material before it, and in light of counsel's instruction that the claimant had been invited to a meeting before dismissal and declined it, it was not satisfied that the unfair dismissal allegation had little reasonable prospect of success. No final merits decision was made on the underlying unfair dismissal, breach of contract, redundancy, or wage claims, and no monetary award was ordered.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Preliminary issue: the tribunal held that the claimant was employed under contracts of service and that the Respondent's committee retained authority to bind the company despite the lack of an AGM and annual resignations. The tribunal also refused the Respondent's deposit order application; it did not determine the substantive dismissal or deduction claims. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
8 references- Arnold v Britton
- Autoclenz Limited v Belcher
- s.230 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Nethermere (St Neots) v Gardiner
- Express & Echo Publications Ltd v Tanton
- Van Rensburg v Royal Borough of Kingston-Upon-Thames
- rule 39 deposit order test
- s.98(4) 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.