Claimant v London Technology Club Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
This preliminary hearing determined employment status only. The unfair dismissal claim has not yet been substantively determined on its merits.
This preliminary hearing determined employment status only. The sex discrimination claims under the Equality Act 2010 have not yet been substantively determined on their merits.
This preliminary hearing determined employment status only. The pregnancy discrimination claims have not yet been substantively determined on their merits.
This preliminary hearing determined employment status only. Claims under the Maternity and Parental Leave Regulations 1999 have not yet been substantively determined on their merits.
The tribunal found that the management commission fee of £42,272 was properly payable to the claimant as wages under s.27 ERA 1996 in connection with her employment with the first respondent. The payment was agreed as part of her overall remuneration package and was her personal allocation of bonus for 2023, despite the proposed payment mechanism through a BVI entity.
Facts
The claimant was engaged by the first respondent, a technology club for investors, initially under a consultancy agreement via her personal service company from February 2020. Her role expanded significantly from one day per week to effectively full-time work by mid-2021. She took on increasing responsibilities including operations, investment activities, line management, and senior management roles. The respondents argued she remained a self-employed contractor throughout. The claimant brought claims under ERA 1996, Equality Act 2010, and Maternity and Parental Leave Regulations, plus a claim for unpaid commission of £42,272.
Decision
The tribunal found that while the claimant started as a genuine independent contractor in February 2020, by July 2021 she had become a worker within the meaning of s.230(3) ERA 1996, and by November 2021 she had become an employee within the meaning of s.230(1) ERA 1996. The tribunal also found it had jurisdiction to determine the unpaid commission claim as the £42,272 was properly payable as wages under s.27 ERA 1996, despite the respondent's argument that it was payable by a separate BVI entity.
Practical note
Employment status can evolve over time: an initially genuine consultancy arrangement can transform into worker status and then full employment as control, integration, and mutual obligations develop, regardless of the parties' original intentions or maintained contractual labels.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6014760/2024
- Decision date
- 9 December 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- technology
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Investment Director
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister