A Perera (lay representative) For the v S McIntosh (consultant) — 2024

The claimant brought claims for unpaid wages and holiday pay, asserting he had been employed by the respondent from 13 July 2022 until 23 March 2023. The respondent contended that he was engaged on a freelance basis as a back end developer at an hourly rate of £10.10 following an email offer of 13 July 2022, and that no employment contract existed. The claimant was domiciled in Sri Lanka and could not give oral evidence; he was represented in a lay capacity by Mr Perera, and the respondent's only witness, Ms Matthew, had no direct knowledge of the claimant's engagement.

Applying Ready Mixed Concrete, Nethermere, Carmichael and Autoclenz, Employment Judge Anderson considered personal service, control and mutuality of obligation. The judge found no evidence of an obligation of personal service (messages of 23 March 2023 indicated the claimant was working with someone else), no evidence on control, and no mutuality of obligation beyond the respondent's undertaking to pay £10.10 per hour for work done. The 23 March 2023 WhatsApp exchange was found to show a fresh fixed-rate project being offered and declined, not a termination of employment. References to Tier 2 sponsorship did not assist because no sponsorship was in fact provided.

The tribunal concluded that the 13 July 2022 email evidenced a contract for services rather than a contract of service, and that the claimant was neither an employee nor a worker for the purposes of s.230 ERA 1996. The tribunal accordingly had no jurisdiction and the claim was dismissed. The judge separately commented that the respondent, despite legal representation, had made no disclosure and had treated the process with contempt.