Mr Ali Karami v Mr Anthony Hall — 2019

The hearing was an open preliminary hearing limited to whether the Claimant's unfair dismissal claim should be dismissed on the basis that he was not employed by the Respondent. The tribunal referred to sections 94 and 230 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It also considered a 68-page bundle and evidence from both parties. The Claimant accepted that he had been employed by NSL in roles at the London Borough of Waltham Forest and that NSL terminated his employment on 8 May 2019.

The tribunal found that Mr Hall was an employee of the London Borough of Waltham Forest and Head of Parking there. It accepted that the borough had a service level agreement with NSL allowing staff to be removed from site, and it did not accept the Claimant's allegation that the relevant excerpt of the agreement was fabricated. The tribunal concluded that Mr Hall had influence over the Claimant's continued engagement at LBWF through NSL, but that he could not be regarded as the Claimant's employer. The Claimant's complaint email of 25 March 2019 did not mention Mr Hall and was treated, at most, as showing a relationship with LBWF rather than with the Respondent.

On that basis, the tribunal held that the Claimant was not an employee of Mr Hall and therefore had no unfair dismissal claim against him. The substantive claim was dismissed. Following judgment, the Respondent applied for costs under rule 76 of the ET Rules, seeking £554 for attendance costs. The tribunal found it was not reasonable for the Claimant to maintain that he was employed by Mr Hall, but took account of his means, including that he was receiving universal credit, and ordered him to pay £25 in respect of the Respondent's legal costs of attendance.