Claimant v Mr Finbarr O'Connell
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that at the relevant time, the claimant was not an employee of any of the respondents as defined by section 230 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. As a result, the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to determine the unfair dismissal complaint and it was struck out.
The tribunal found that the claimant was not an employee as defined by section 230 ERA 1996, meaning the tribunal lacked jurisdiction. Additionally, even if jurisdiction existed, the claim was brought out of time as it was reasonably practicable to bring it before 23 January 2025.
The tribunal determined the claimant was not an employee of any respondent under section 230 ERA 1996, therefore the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the wrongful dismissal complaint and it was struck out.
The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to bring the whistleblowing detriment complaint before 23 January 2025, the date the complaint was submitted. As a result, the complaint was brought out of time and was struck out.
Facts
Mr Hutchings brought claims against Mr O'Connell, Mr Hardman and S&W Partners LLP including unfair dismissal, automatic unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal and whistleblowing detriment. The case proceeded to a preliminary hearing on 14 May 2025 to determine employment status and time limit issues. Mr Hutchings represented himself while the respondents were represented by counsel.
Decision
The tribunal struck out all claims. The dismissal claims were struck out because the tribunal found Mr Hutchings was not an employee within the meaning of section 230 ERA 1996, depriving the tribunal of jurisdiction. The whistleblowing detriment claim was struck out for being out of time, as it was reasonably practicable to bring it before the date it was submitted on 23 January 2025.
Practical note
Employment status is a threshold jurisdictional requirement for unfair and wrongful dismissal claims, and tribunals will strictly apply time limits where it was reasonably practicable to submit claims within the statutory period.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2301261/2024
- Decision date
- 19 May 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- —
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No