in person For the v Ms Sasman, money laundering risk officer — 2025

The claimant brought claims for failure to pay wages, failure to pay during a notice period, and failure to pay accrued holiday pay arising out of a service agreement dated 14 June 2022 with the respondent, under which he was engaged as head of sales at an annual salary of £60,000. The claimant was resident in Kazakhstan and never visited the UK or held a UK visa permitting him to work here, although the contract recorded that he warranted he was entitled to work in the United Kingdom. Neither party had obtained the necessary permissions for the claimant or his witness to give evidence from abroad, and the respondent elected to call no witness, so the tribunal proceeded on the basis of the pleadings and undisputed facts.

Applying the framework set out by Underhill LJ in Okedina v Chikale [2019] EWCA Civ 1393, the judge considered common law illegality in the performance of the contract. It was common ground that the claimant never held a work visa and that no tax was deducted at source or accounted for to HMRC, as evidenced by wage slips showing gross pay with no PAYE or National Insurance deductions. The judge found that both parties knew the contractual warranty as to right to work was untrue and that both actively participated in ensuring tax was not paid.

The judge concluded under rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 that the claims had no reasonable prospect of success. The circumstances were described as so extreme and premeditated, and the fraud on the Revenue as clear, serious, and premeditated, that there was no prospect of the tribunal enforcing the contract. All claims were accordingly dismissed.