Case 2302958/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Carbeck v Eros International Limited (in administration) and 2 others — 2023
- Case reference
- 2302958/2022
- Decision date
- 2 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ramsden Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Mr M Carbeck
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal determined a preliminary issue about whether the Second Respondent or Third Respondent had an employment relationship with the Claimant for the purposes of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The Claimant was agreed to have been employed by the First Respondent from 28 April 2014 to 22 July 2022, but the First Respondent was in administration and the claims against it were stayed.
The tribunal found that the Claimant was neither an employee nor a worker of the Second or Third Respondent. It noted the written contract with the First Respondent, the surrounding corporate group arrangements, the Claimant's work for the wider group, and the history of contractual amendments, but concluded there was no shared understanding that the Second or Third Respondent also employed or engaged him.
On that basis, the complaints against the Second and Third Respondents were dismissed. No remedy was awarded in this preliminary issue judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Dismissed against the Second and Third Respondents only after a preliminary issue decision that neither was the Claimant's employee or worker employer for Employment Rights Act 1996 purposes. Claims against the First Respondent were stayed because it was in administration. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed against the Second and Third Respondents only after a preliminary issue decision that neither was the Claimant's employee or worker employer for Employment Rights Act 1996 purposes. Claims against the First Respondent were stayed because it was in administration. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Employment Rights Act 1996 employee and worker status
- Uber check
- Ter-Berg
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.