Claimant v Anglo Thai Limited

The tribunal found that the First Claimant, Mr Somboonsarn, was not an employee of either respondent. He had significant flexibility in his work, controlled his own salary, set his own holiday, and operated across multiple businesses as an entrepreneur and owner. Without employee status, he could not bring an unfair dismissal claim.

The First Claimant's breach of contract claim for wrongful dismissal failed for the same reason—he was not an employee. The tribunal concluded he acted as a director and beneficial owner across several businesses, not as an employee under a contract of service.

The Second Claimant, Ms Dudar, was found to be an employee of both respondents performing distinct work for each. The respondents ceased paying her salary without warning or procedure, which amounted to a dismissal. Although there was an irretrievable breakdown in trust, the lack of any fair procedure rendered the dismissal unfair.

The Second Claimant was entitled to one month's notice as a long-standing employee paid monthly. She received no notice and was summarily dismissed. The tribunal awarded one month's gross pay (£1,400 from each respondent) for breach of contract, subject to tax and NI deductions.