Case 2306760/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Beeby First v Secretary of State for Business and Trade Second Respondent: AG Homes Limited (in liquidation) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2306760/2023
- Decision date
- 22 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Robinson Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Beeby First
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a video hearing on 22 July 2024, Employment Judge Robinson heard the case at London South. The tribunal held that Mr J Beeby was not an employee of AG Homes Limited (in liquidation), the second respondent.
Because the tribunal found there was no employment relationship with the second respondent, the claimant's claims for redundancy pay, holiday pay, arrears of pay and notice pay were dismissed. The written record states that the judgment was given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was not an employee of the second respondent, so the redundancy pay claim was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the claimant was not an employee of the second respondent, so the holiday pay claim was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claimant was not an employee of the second respondent, so the arrears of pay claim was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was not an employee of the second respondent, so the notice pay claim was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.