Claimant's Employment Claims Dismissed by Employment Judge Lancaster
📌 In brief
The Employment Tribunal in Leeds dismissed the claimant's case because they were not considered an employee or worker of the company, despite being a joint director. The judge ruled that since the claimant had secured other paid work by mutual agreement with their co-director, they could not make claims for wages, redundancy, or notice pay.
⚖️ Legal holding
A joint director and shareholder is not considered an employee or worker under the Employment Rights Act 1996 for the purposes of claiming wages, redundancy, or notice pay.
📖 Technical summary
The claimant's claims were dismissed as they were neither an employee nor a worker and had obtained alternative employment.
📜 Headnote Official document
The claimant, who was a joint director and shareholder of the first respondent company, brought claims for wages, redundancy, or notice pay. The Employment Judge dismissed these claims as the claimant was neither an employee nor a worker under the relevant legislation and had obtained alternative paid employment.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Dismissed
Case: 6039799/2025
1
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Claimant: [redacted]
Respondents: [redacted]
(2) The Secretary of State for Business and Trade
AT A HEARING
Heard at: Leeds by CVP (online) On: 28th April 2026 Before: Employment Judge Lancaster
Appearances For the claimant: [redacted]
In person For the respondents: [redacted]
(2) Ms [APPELLANT] The Claimant, as a joint director and shareholder, was neither an employee nor a worker under a contract with the First Respondent and the claims are dismissed. In any event the Claimant voluntarily and by mutual agreement with his co-director obtained alternative paid employment and, having been paid his claimed director’s fees up-to-date, ceased doing any work for the First Respondent prior to any actual notice of closure of the business and could not therefore have claimed for arrears of wages, or for redundancy or notice pay in respect of any purported dismissal.
.
EMPLOYMENT JUDGE LANCASTER
DATE 28th April2026
Note
Case: 6039799/2025
2 Summary reasons for the judgment having been given orally at the hearing, written reasons will not be provided unless a written request is presented by either party within 14 days of the sending of this written record of the decision.
Public access to employment tribunal decisions Judgments and reasons for the judgments are published, in full, online at www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions shortly after a copy has been sent to the claimant(s) and respondent(s) in a case.
Recording and Transcription Please note that if a Tribunal hearing has been recorded you may request a transcript of the recording, for which a charge may be payable. If a transcript is produced it will not include any oral judgment or reasons given at the hearing. The transcript will not be checked, approved or verified by a judge. There is more information in the joint Presidential Practice Direction on the Recording and Transcription of Hearings, and accompanying Guidance, which can be found here:
https://www.judiciary.uk/guidance-and-resources/employment-rules-and-legislation-practice- directions/
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal: Claimants Not Found to Be Employees
- Employment Tribunal Home Office Wins Disability Discrimination Case at Employment Tribunal
- Employment Tribunal Unfair Dismissal Claim Rejected Due to Capability Issues
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rejects Disability Discrimination and Victimisation Com…
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Dismisses Claims Due to Time Limit Issues
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rejects All Discrimination Claims Against DVLA
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rejects All Claimant's Complaints Against Employer
A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The claimant does not meet the statutory definition of an employee under section 230 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
- There are no grounds for claims under applicable statutes regarding reasonable adjustments or discriminatory practices.
- The employer's actions do not constitute wrongful dismissal or breach of employment contract regarding notice periods.
- The complaint lacks merit, and there is no evidence to substantiate the claimant's allegations.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Employment Judge dismissed the claimant's case as they were neither an employee nor a worker and had obtained alternative paid employment.
Who was involved?
A joint director of a company (the claimant) brought claims against their own company and the Secretary of State for Business and Trade.
How did the court decide, and why?
The judge ruled that since the claimant was not an employee or worker under employment law and had secured other paid work by mutual agreement with their co-director, they could not make claims for wages, redundancy, or notice pay.
Which laws or rules were applied?
No specific provisions of the Employment Rights Act 1996 or any other legislation were cited in this judgment.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The claimant's status as a joint director and shareholder, who had obtained alternative paid employment by mutual agreement with their co-director, was crucial to the decision.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the claimant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar position would likely face dismissal if they are not considered an employee or worker and have obtained alternative employment.
What evidence or documents mattered?
No specific evidence or documents were mentioned as critical to the decision.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions from Employment Tribunals can typically be appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor if you are considering bringing or defending an employment claim.