Case 2411299/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A Wilson (1), Miss A Bather (2), Mrs K Aldred (3) and Mrs R Flanagan (4) v St Philips Community Centre & Preschool and 4 others — 2023
- Case reference
- 2411299/2021
- Decision date
- 25 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McCarthy
Parties
6 namedClaimant
Mrs A Wilson (1), Miss A Bather (2), Mrs K Aldred (3) and Mrs R Flanagan (4)
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a reserved preliminary judgment on who the correct employer and respondents were for the four claimants' cases. The tribunal found that the employer of all four claimants was the Management Committee of St Philips Community Centre, not the Parochial Church Council (PCC). It held that the first respondent should be renamed as the Management Committee of St Philips Community Centre, and that the Management Committee was an unincorporated association.
The tribunal relied on the claimants' contracts of employment, payslips, P60s, employee records and redundancy documents. Mrs Wilson's Principal Statement identified St Philips Community Centre Management Committee as the employer, and the tribunal found that the same was true for the other claimants. It also found that the redundancy process for the second, third and fourth claimants was run by Mr Wood as chair of the Management Committee, that the claimants had no dealings with the PCC during their employment, and that the PCC had limited knowledge of the Centre's day-to-day affairs.
Applying the authorities it cited on unincorporated associations and employment tribunal respondents, the tribunal concluded that the relevant respondents were the members of the Management Committee at the time the claims arose. It found those members to be Ms S Lloyd and Mr S Wood, and added Mr Ken Smith, Ms Rita Mills and Reverend J Clawson as respondents. It removed Ms Conroy because she had resigned from the Management Committee on 24 June 2021 and was not a member at the relevant time.
The tribunal also removed the PCC as respondent because it was not the employer of any of the claimants. It noted that the substantive claims listed in the case, including unfair dismissal, redundancy pay, notice pay and Mrs Wilson's constructive unfair dismissal/whistleblowing-related complaint, were not being decided at this hearing and were left for a further preliminary hearing and eventual final hearing.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Reserved preliminary hearing only. The tribunal did not determine the substantive claims for unfair dismissal, redundancy pay, notice pay or whistleblowing; it decided respondent identity and joinder/removal only. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Burrell definition of an unincorporated association
- Affleck v Newcastle Mind / Nazir respondent rule
- Rule 34 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.