In person For the v Respondent — 2024

The claimant brought a claim of unfair dismissal arising from his work for Al Jazeera Media Network. He said he had been employed from 1 March 2019 to 23 November 2023 as a research consultant, and the tribunal understood the pleaded case to be one of constructive unfair dismissal. The preliminary hearing was listed to determine employment status, time limits, and the claimant's strike-out application against the response.

The tribunal found that the early material in 2019, including the January email and the February non-disclosure agreement, did not show any intention to create a contract of service. It rejected the claimant's case that there had been a memorandum of agreement dated 22 February 2019, and found no evidence that he was employed by the respondent before June or July 2021.

For the later arrangement, the tribunal accepted that the parties entered into an agreement under which the claimant provided research and brief-writing services and undertook not to share information about the Gold Mafia project with another journalist before completion of the series, in return for £1,000 per month. Applying Ready Mixed Concrete, Autoclenz, and the need for control, personal service and mutuality of obligation, the tribunal found there was some mutuality of obligation but no requirement for personal service and no evidence of sufficient control. It also relied on the invoices issued by Media Origins Limited, the description of the work as consultancy, and the absence of evidence that the respondent handled tax or national insurance.

The tribunal therefore concluded that the claimant was not an employee of the respondent at any relevant time. Because employee status was not established, the tribunal held that it had no jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal claim and dismissed it. It said there was no need to consider time limits in those circumstances.