Miss Lilia Mouhoubi v Grant Thornton LLP — 2025

At this preliminary hearing the tribunal determined that Miss Mouhoubi was a worker within section 230 ERA 1996, but not an employee. The tribunal reviewed the Assignment Only Worker Agreement, the handbook, and the Assignment Schedule for the claimant’s first assignment, which ran from 20 November 2023 to 1 December 2023. It found that the contractual documents repeatedly stated that the relationship was not an employment contract, that there was no obligation on either side to offer or accept future work, and that each assignment was separate and severable.

The tribunal accepted that the claimant was subject to significant control while on the particular assignment. She had set hours and working days, detailed task inputs in an Excel spreadsheet, and was expected to keep the client relationship manager updated on progress and issues. However, the tribunal held that these features did not outweigh the overall contractual structure. Outside assignments, remuneration and benefits ceased, there was no obligation to accept work, and the claimant was not working under an overarching contract of employment.

Applying the Ready Mixed Concrete approach and the other authorities it cited, the tribunal concluded that the claimant was in a position of subordination on the assignment but did not have the mutuality of obligation and overall contractual consistency needed for employee status. It therefore found that the claimant could not pursue ordinary employee-only claims in the Employment Tribunal. The claim for automatic unfair dismissal on the whistleblowing route was struck out, as were the redundancy payment and breach of contract claims.

The tribunal stated that the claimant could still pursue claims as a worker for unlawful deduction from wages, unpaid holiday pay, and detriment for whistleblowing under section 47B ERA 1996. It identified the alleged detriments as the early cancellation of the assignment, the failure to offer a further Birmingham assignment, and the failure to offer a six-month placement with Oxford University. Those claims were not determined at this hearing, and no monetary award was made.