Case 2400234/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Luck v R1: New Code Partnership Limited R2: Mr M Dev — 2024
- Case reference
- 2400234/2024
- Decision date
- 5 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspinall Representation
- Venue
- Liverpool
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs J Luck
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought complaints of constructive unfair dismissal, breach of contract for notice pay, unauthorised deduction from wages and outstanding holiday pay against New Code Partnership Limited and Mr M Dev. The complaints against the second respondent were dismissed on withdrawal. The central issue was whether the claimant was an employee or worker of New Code following a purported TUPE transfer in February 2017 from a predecessor company.
The Tribunal found that the claimant had not performed any work since before 2008, when her relationship with her former husband (a co-founder of the original company) broke down. The Tribunal found that the reality of the post-2008 arrangement was a domestic maintenance agreement paid through the company rather than an employment or worker relationship, with no mutuality of obligation. The claimant accepted under cross-examination that her CV listing administrative duties until 2023 did not reflect work actually performed.
Applying the statutory definitions in s.230 ERA 1996 and relevant case law on worker status, the Tribunal concluded the claimant was neither an employee nor a worker of Marking or New Code. Consequently, the unfair dismissal and breach of contract claims were not well founded; there were no wages properly payable, so no unauthorised deduction occurred; and there was no entitlement to paid annual leave. All remaining complaints failed.
Claims and outcomes
10 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Constructive unfair dismissal complaint. Tribunal found the claimant was not an employee of New Code, so the complaint was not well founded and failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Notice pay claim. Failed because the claimant was not an employee of the respondent. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Shortfalls in pay claim. Failed because the claimant was not a worker of the respondent; payments were ex gratia maintenance, not wages. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Holiday pay pursued as a s.23 ERA unauthorised deduction from wages complaint. Failed because the claimant was not a worker. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | All complaints against the second respondent (Mr M Dev) personally were dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Constructive unfair dismissal complaint. Tribunal found the claimant was not an employee of New Code, so the complaint was not well founded and failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract |
Legal tests applied
8 references- s.230(1) ERA 1996
- s.95(1)(c) ERA 1996
- s.23 ERA 1996
- Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006
- Working Time Regulations 1998
- Pimlico Plumbers
- Uber
- Addison Lee
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.