Ms C Thompson v L M Merchandising Limited — 2022

The claimant brought a claim for a redundancy payment arising out of the respondent's cessation of trading. The tribunal identified the central issue as whether Ms Thompson was an employee within the meaning of section 230 Employment Rights Act 1996, because a redundancy payment under section 135 depends on employee status and dismissal by reason of redundancy.

On the evidence, the tribunal found that the parties had agreed that the claimant would perform merchandising work as a self-employed person. It relied on the written agreement dated 20 March 2012, the fact that the claimant could accept or refuse work, the ability to send a substitute, the claimant's provision of her own tools, her ability to work for other companies, and the practice of submitting monthly invoices for payment. The tribunal also found there was no control by the respondent over when and how the work was carried out.

The tribunal therefore concluded that the claimant was not an employee of the respondent and failed on the threshold jurisdictional point. The redundancy payment claim was dismissed for that reason. The reasons also record that the respondent's business was announced to be ceasing trading on 31 March 2020, but that did not assist the claimant because employee status was not established.