Claimant v J and U Services Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Tribunal found claimant was not an employee within the meaning of s230(1) ERA 1996 but was the widow of the late company director acting in a domestic/family capacity. No contract of employment existed and no intention to create legal relations was established. Therefore claimant not entitled to bring unfair dismissal claim.
Claimant not entitled to notice pay because tribunal found she was not an employee but rather acted as partner and then wife of Mr James in a domestic arrangement with no mutuality of obligation or contractual relationship with either R1 or R2.
Tribunal found the three payments of £20,000 were advances for project costs, not wages. Claimant was not on the payroll of R1 or R2, never received formal wage payments, and failed to establish worker status under s230(3) ERA 1996.
Claimant not entitled to holiday pay as tribunal found she was not an employee or worker within the meaning of s230 ERA 1996 or the Working Time Regulations 1998. She acted in a domestic/family capacity without contractual obligation.
Facts
Claimant was the widow of the late Mr Jonathan James, Managing Director of R1 and sole Director of R2. She claimed to have been employed as Estate Manager from June 2021 to October 2023 following discussions about formalising her work on land development projects. Mr James died in July 2022. Claimant was never added to R1 or R2 payroll, received no formal contract, and received three payments of £20,000 which she claimed were wages. She had been employed by a separate company (My Glass Project Ltd) since 2018 on £12,000 pa. She also set up Fenton Fields Limited and created payslips showing herself as employed by that entity.
Decision
The tribunal found the claimant was not an employee or worker of either R1 or R2. The relationship was domestic and familial with no intention to create legal relations. There was no mutuality of obligation, no control, no agreed terms, and no formal steps taken to establish employment despite Mr James being an experienced businessman. The £20,000 payments were advances for project costs, not wages. All claims dismissed.
Practical note
Domestic and family working arrangements require clear evidence of intention to create legal relations and mutuality of obligation — vague aspirational discussions and informal involvement in a family business, even with financial contributions, will not establish employment status, particularly where the alleged employer takes no formal steps to create the relationship.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1303076/2024
- Decision date
- 14 July 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Estate Manager
- Salary band
- £40,000–£50,000
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No