Case 2600693/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Mr W Donaghue v Steamin Billy (Oadby) Ltd — 2022

Case reference: 2600693/2022
Decision date: 9 August 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Fredericks Appearances
Venue: Leicester

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr W Donaghue

Respondent

Steamin Billy (Oadby) Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal heard a preliminary issue at Leicester on 8 and 9 August 2022 before Employment Judge Fredericks. The claimant was represented by Mr C Johnstone, Senior Advocate, and the respondent by Mrs J Duane, Counsel.

The claimant's claims in respect of 'detrimental treatment and bullying and harassment as a result of association with someone who is disabled' were dismissed upon withdrawal. The judgment does not set out a separate merits determination on those allegations.

The tribunal found that Mr Donaghue was not at any time an employee or worker of Steamin Billy (Oadby) Ltd. As a result, all remaining claims were dismissed because the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear them. No remedy was awarded. The judgment records that oral reasons were given at the hearing and that written reasons would only be provided if requested within 14 days.

Claims and outcomes

5 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Disability discrimination	Claims described as 'detrimental treatment and bullying and harassment as a result of association with someone who is disabled' were dismissed upon withdrawal.	Withdrawn	Disability	—
Unfair dismissal	Dismissed because the tribunal found the claimant was not at any time an employee or worker of the respondent and therefore had no jurisdiction. The judgment does not separate this claim out individually, but it falls within the 'remaining claims' dismissed on that basis.	Dismissed	—	—
Redundancy	Dismissed because the tribunal found the claimant was not at any time an employee or worker of the respondent and therefore had no jurisdiction. The judgment does not separate this claim out individually, but it falls within the 'remaining claims' dismissed on that basis.	Dismissed	—	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	Dismissed because the tribunal found the claimant was not at any time an employee or worker of the respondent and therefore had no jurisdiction. The judgment does not separate this claim out individually, but it falls within the 'remaining claims' dismissed on that basis.	Dismissed	—	—
Breach of contract	Dismissed because the tribunal found the claimant was not at any time an employee or worker of the respondent and therefore had no jurisdiction. The judgment does not separate this claim out individually, but it falls within the 'remaining claims' dismissed on that basis.

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.