Mr M Goody v Electec Electrical Ltd — 2022

This was a reserved judgment at a preliminary hearing on whether Mr Goody had the two years' continuous employment needed to bring unfair dismissal and statutory redundancy payment claims. The parties agreed that his employment ended on 15 September 2021; the dispute was when employment began. Mr Goody said he was employed from 1 August 2019, while Electec said employment did not begin until 15 October 2019.

The tribunal accepted that Mr Goody and Mr Prichard discussed the possibility of Mr Goody working for Electec at a meeting on 31 July 2019, and that the relationship deepened after that date. However, it rejected Mr Goody's evidence that a job had been offered and accepted on 31 July 2019. The tribunal relied on the later interview process in early September, the 10 September 2019 offer letter stating that the start date was to be agreed and anticipated in early October, the WhatsApp messages referring to a welcome to the team in October, and the fact that Mr Goody remained employed by Lightplan until 15 October 2019.

The tribunal found that the contractual relationship crystallised on 15 October 2019, when Mr Goody left Lightplan, began working from Electec's office, and was paid a salary on the basis of a join date of 15 October 2019. It accepted that this was also when the practical features of employment became more definite, including set hours and Electec's greater control over his work. Applying the statutory rules on continuous employment and the authorities it cited, the tribunal held that work done before that date fell within the earlier consultancy-type arrangement rather than employment under a contract of service.

As a result, Mr Goody did not have the qualifying service required by s.108 Employment Rights Act 1996 for unfair dismissal or by s.155 Employment Rights Act 1996 for a statutory redundancy payment. Both claims were dismissed. The judgment did not determine the unauthorised deductions claim mentioned in the background to the case.