Case 3203902/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Rickard v The National Centre for Social Research — 2022
- Case reference
- 3203902/2022
- Decision date
- 21 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Park Appearances
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Rickard
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant pursued only a breach of contract claim. At the start of the hearing, it was confirmed with him that this was the only claim he was advancing.
The tribunal recorded that the Employment Tribunal Act 1996 and the ETs Extension of Jurisdiction (England & Wales) Order 1994 confer jurisdiction to hear breach of contract claims brought by employees. The parties agreed, however, that the Claimant was a worker within the meaning of section 230(3) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and the tribunal found that he was not an employee.
Because the Claimant was not an employee, the tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the breach of contract claim. The claim was therefore dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | At the outset of the hearing it was confirmed that this was the only claim pursued. The tribunal held that, although the Employment Tribunal Act 1996 and the ETs Extension of Jurisdiction (England & Wales) Order 1994 confer jurisdiction over certain breach of contract claims, the Claimant was not an employee and was instead agreed to be a worker under s.230(3) ERA 1996, so the tribunal had no jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.