Case 2600461/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Karen MacGregor v (trading as Camwal Engineering) and 2 others — 2021
- Case reference
- 2600461/2021
- Decision date
- 7 December 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge P Britton Representation
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
4 namedKey findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt an open preliminary hearing, the tribunal considered who, if anyone, employed Miss Karen MacGregor. The tribunal found that she was not self-employed and was an employee of either Mr Kevin Augustus Kavanagh or 4 Front Design Ltd. It held that the first claim would continue against Mr Kavanagh, and that the second claim would continue only against 4 Front Design Ltd, which was in creditors voluntary liquidation and was to be re-served on the liquidator.
The tribunal dismissed the second claim against Soho Offices Ltd, Reynolds Venue Ltd, Property Soho Ltd and Greasy Spoon Eats Ltd because there was no evidence, including from the claimant, that any of those companies employed her. The issue whether the employer was Mr Kavanagh or 4 Front Design Ltd was left for the final hearing.
The judgment recorded that the claimant's substantive claims were unfair dismissal, breach of contract for notice pay, holiday pay, outstanding wages and an unclear 'other' claim. Those claims were not determined at this preliminary hearing. The tribunal noted that compensation for emotional distress or injury to feelings was not available on the claims pleaded, and that any compensation would be financial loss only. It referred to a possible basic award calculation of £2,280 on the claimant's case, but made no award.
The tribunal ordered Mr Kavanagh to provide a full explanation for non-attendance at three hearings, supported by a doctor's letter, by 14 January 2022, failing which he would be struck out from defending the case. It also ordered the claimant to provide a schedule of loss with details of the basic award, future loss, unpaid wages and holiday pay claims, and relisted the matter for 1 March 2022 to determine the unfair dismissal and other claims if they remained defended, or otherwise address remedy.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment identified unfair dismissal as one of the claimant's claims but did not determine its merits; the matter was relisted for final hearing or remedy if undefended. | Other | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment identified a breach of contract notice pay claim but did not determine its merits. | Other | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment identified a holiday pay claim but did not determine its merits and ordered further particulars in a schedule of loss. | Other | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment identified an outstanding wages claim but did not determine its merits and ordered further particulars in a schedule of loss. | Other | — | — |
| Other | The judgment referred to an 'other' claim but said it was not clear what this was. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Polkey v A E Dayton
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.