Claimant v DigiDoe Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal struck out the claim on the basis that the contract was tainted by illegality in performance. The claimant never had a right to work in the UK (no visa or permit) and both parties deliberately failed to account for tax to HMRC, constituting a serious and premeditated fraud on the Revenue. Given the claimant's knowledge and active participation, there was no reasonable prospect of the tribunal enforcing the contract.
The tribunal struck out the claim for failure to pay during the notice period on the basis that the contract was illegal in performance. Both parties knew the claimant had no right to work in the UK and deliberately failed to deduct or pay any tax, amounting to a clear fraud on the Revenue. The illegality was so extreme and premeditated that there was no reasonable prospect of the tribunal allowing enforcement of the contract.
The tribunal struck out the holiday pay claim on the same basis as the other claims: the contract was tainted by illegality in performance due to the claimant having no right to work in the UK and both parties deliberately defrauding HMRC by not accounting for tax. As the holiday pay claim was underpinned by the illegal contract, there was no reasonable prospect of success.
Facts
The claimant, a Kazakh national, entered into a service agreement with the UK respondent company in June 2022 as Head of Sales on £60,000 per annum. The contract stated he had a right to work in the UK, but he never obtained a work visa or permit and never visited the UK, working remotely from abroad. No tax was deducted from his salary during his employment from June 2022 to May 2024. After termination, he claimed unpaid wages, notice pay, and holiday pay. The hearing was conducted remotely with the claimant in Argentina, his witness in Turkey, and the respondent's representative in South Africa, but neither the claimant nor his witness could give evidence due to lack of permission.
Decision
Employment Judge Hodgson struck out all claims on the basis they had no reasonable prospect of success. The tribunal found the contract was tainted by illegality in performance: the claimant had no right to work in the UK and both parties knowingly and deliberately failed to account for tax, constituting a serious and premeditated fraud on HMRC. Given the extreme circumstances and the claimant's full knowledge and active participation, public policy prevented enforcement of the contract.
Practical note
A contract tainted by serious and premeditated illegality, such as employing someone without right to work and deliberately defrauding HMRC, will not be enforced by the tribunal even for wages, notice pay, or holiday pay claims where both parties knowingly participated in the illegal arrangement.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6012932/2024
- Decision date
- 10 September 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Name
- DigiDoe Ltd
- Sector
- technology
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep
Employment details
- Role
- Head of Sales
- Salary band
- £60,000–£80,000
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No