Joseph Johnson v Pure Gym Limited Tarique Kalam Cristian Mitrea Aaron Pearce Alex Munn Emi Howarth Chris Morton Simon Birchall Ryan Johnson Gym Careers Limited T/a Pure Gym Academy Kate Ford Fiona Wharmby Chinwe Inyamah — 2023

Joseph Johnson brought race discrimination claims against Pure Gym Ltd, Gym Careers Ltd t/a Pure Gym Academy, and named employees. He ran martial arts sessions at Pure Gym's Leytonstone gym and was also enrolled on the Academy course leading to the Level 3 qualification needed for personal training. At the hearing he said he was a student, not an employee or worker, of the Academy.

On that evidence the tribunal dismissed the Academy claims during the hearing because there was no employment or worker relationship to found Equality Act jurisdiction. The tribunal explained that it could only hear such claims where the claimant was an employee or worker of the respondent.

As to Pure Gym, the tribunal found that the arrangement was that Pure Gym allowed him to use studio space on Sundays for his own martial arts classes when it was otherwise unused. He made no formal application, was not interviewed or placed on Dayforce, was inducted as a student rather than an employee, was not given a uniform, locker or staff kitchen access, supplied his own equipment, ran his own booking system, decided what to charge, and kept any fees. Pure Gym did not pay him and had no visibility of the finances. The tribunal acknowledged that free studio use, the no-contact rule, and the fact that sessions ran when the gym was otherwise empty might point in that direction, but held that the overall evidence showed he was neither an employee nor a worker, so the remaining race discrimination claims were dismissed. No remedy was awarded.