Case 6028183/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Weedon v Secretary of State for Business & Trade and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 6028183/2025
- Decision date
- 15 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Havard Representation
- Venue
- Cardiff via CVP
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr P Weedon
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the matter at Cardiff via CVP on 15 December 2025 before Employment Judge R Havard. The Claimant appeared in person, the First Respondent was represented by Ms H Riezzo of the Insolvency Service, and the Second Respondent did not appear.
The judgment records a single substantive finding: the Claimant was an employee of the Second Respondent within section 230(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. No merits decision was made on the underlying tribunal claims at this stage.
The tribunal ordered that the case be listed for a public hearing with a time estimate of half a day. The written judgment also states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | This judgment did not determine any substantive claim. It only decided a preliminary issue that the Claimant was an employee of the Second Respondent under section 230(1) ERA 1996 and listed the case for a further public hearing. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.230(1) ERA 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.