Case 4101740/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Sunitha Kemlo v Represented by:10 Mr N Paterson - Solicitor Blackfaulds House Nursing Home Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 4101740/2023
- Decision date
- 27 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge J McCluskey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Sunitha Kemlo
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the public preliminary hearing on 30 and 31 May 2023, the tribunal decided only the preliminary issue of whether Ms Sunitha Kemlo was employed by Blackfaulds House Nursing Home Ltd for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010 during the period from about June 2021 to 24 September 2022. The claimant had said she brought claims of direct race discrimination, race-related harassment, and unfair constructive dismissal under the Equality Act 2010.
The tribunal found that the work was carried out through Bizz Nurse Ltd, which invoiced the respondent and received payment for the claimant’s services. It found there was no contract between the claimant and the respondent, no mutuality of obligation or irreducible minimum of work, and no requirement for personal service. The claimant could choose not to work a shift without permission, and on occasions she arranged for another nurse to cover; the tribunal also found that she carried on a business undertaking through Bizz Nurse Ltd, with the respondent acting as a client or customer.
In reaching that conclusion, the tribunal referred to Sejpal, Uber, Bates van Winkelhof and Pimlico Plumbers, and directed itself to the statutory definitions in s.83 EqA 2010 and s.230 ERA 1996. It considered the factors of personal service, substitution, predominant purpose, subordination, control and integration, and preferred the respondent’s evidence that the claimant was not subject to appraisals or training by the respondent. The tribunal therefore held that it had no jurisdiction to determine the Equality Act complaints and dismissed the claim.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Dismissed at a preliminary hearing for lack of jurisdiction because the tribunal found Ms Kemlo was not an employee within the meaning of s.83 EqA 2010. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Dismissed at a preliminary hearing for lack of jurisdiction because the tribunal found Ms Kemlo was not an employee within the meaning of s.83 EqA 2010. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | Dismissed at a preliminary hearing for lack of jurisdiction because the tribunal found Ms Kemlo was not an employee within the meaning of s.83 EqA 2010. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
14 references- s.83 EqA 2010
- s.230 ERA 1996
- Sejpal v Rodericks Dental Ltd
- Uber BV and ors v Aslam and ors
- Bates van Winkelhof v Clyde & Co LLP
- Pimlico Plumbers Ltd v Smith
- mutuality of obligation
- irreducible minimum
- personal service
- substitution
- predominant purpose
- subordination
- control
- integration
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.