Molly Craigie v East Anglia Home Improvements Limited — 2025

The tribunal determined the claimant's status across two statutory regimes. It found she was not an employee within the meaning of section 230 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 at the relevant time, so it had no jurisdiction to hear her constructive dismissal complaint, which was dismissed. It found she was a worker within section 230 ERA 1996 and an employee within section 83 of the Equality Act 2010 for the purposes of the discrimination claims.

On the substantive money claims, the unauthorised deductions from wages complaint was not well-founded and was dismissed. The holiday pay complaint was upheld: the respondent had failed to pay the claimant in accordance with regulation 14(2) and/or 16(1) of the Working Time Regulations 1998, and the respondent was ordered to pay £4,775.92, with the claimant responsible for any tax or National Insurance.

On the discrimination claims, the victimisation complaint was dismissed upon withdrawal on day one. The tribunal held that the alleged discriminatory acts occurring before 7 June 2023 did not form part of a continuing course of conduct ending after that date and that it was not just and equitable to extend time, so those allegations were dismissed. The remaining sexual harassment complaints, including the events of 15, 16 and 21 June 2023, were considered on their merits and were not well-founded; the tribunal concluded that the conduct alleged did not meet the statutory tests for harassment of a sexual nature in the circumstances found.