Case 2304497/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Ali Mejri v Riddledown Collegiate Multi Academy Trust — 2024
- Case reference
- 2304497/2023
- Decision date
- 31 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Fowell Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Ali Mejri
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the preliminary hearing on 31 January 2024, Employment Judge Fowell struck out the unfair dismissal claim because there was no reasonable prospect of Mr Mejri proving employee status for the purposes of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The judgment recorded that he started work at the School on 2 May 2023 through Reed Specialist Recruitment at £35 per hour, later moved to direct invoicing at £24 per hour, supplied his own tools and vehicle, and was paid by invoice rather than through payroll. Applying the Ready Mixed Concrete, Hall v Lorimer and Carmichael authorities, the tribunal found the relationship showed insufficient control and integration for employee status.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out under Rule 37 on the basis that there was no reasonable prospect of the claimant showing he was an employee within the meaning of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The judge also noted an alternative point that he did not have two years' service, but did not rely on it because no warning had been given about that issue. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
10 references- Rule 37 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure
- section 230 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Ready Mixed Concrete (South East) Ltd v Minister of Pensions and National Insurance
- Hall (Inspector of Taxes) v Lorimer
- Carmichael v National Power plc
- section 83 Equality Act 2010
- Pimlico Plumbers Ltd v Smith
- Byrne Brothers Ltd v Baird
- Bates van Winkelhof v Clyde LLP
- Allonby v Accrington and Rossendale College
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.