Case 6019335/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Service Care Solutions Ltd and London Borough of Lambeth — 2025
- Case reference
- 6019335/2024
- Decision date
- 30 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hopton REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs J Oliver brought a breach of contract claim arising from the withdrawal of a job offer for a Business Support Officer role with Lambeth Council. The tribunal found that the first respondent, Service Care Solutions Ltd, was an employment agency and that Lambeth Council was the hirer. The Assignment Details Form identified Sapphire DNP Limited as the limited company contractor, the claimant as the agency worker, and Lambeth Council as the hirer. The claimant accepted that she was to work on a temporary basis and that neither respondent was intended to be her employer.
The tribunal accepted that the claimant was told the role would be paid at £19 an hour. It also accepted that Lambeth Council offered her the role on 15 August 2024, that she accepted it, and that the assignment was later affected by a recruitment freeze announced on 11 September 2024. The claimant was told by telephone on 12 September 2024 that the offer had been withdrawn. The tribunal found that this was in direct response to the recruitment freeze and that the later email of 26 September 2024 explained the withdrawal as a business need decision and not a reflection on the claimant's capabilities or qualifications.
The tribunal held that there was no offer of employment and no contract of employment between the claimant and either respondent. It relied on the structure set out in the Assignment Details Form and found that the parties' expectations matched that structure. It concluded that this was not a case where it was appropriate to imply a contract between the agency worker and the hirer to give business reality to the relationship. As there was no contract of employment between the claimant and either respondent, the breach of contract claim failed and no compensation could be awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994
- Sarker v South Tees Acute Hospital NHS Trust [1997] IRLR 328
- James v Greenwich LBC [2008] I.C.R. 545
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.