Bookkeeper found self-employed: tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear unfair dismissal claim
An accountant who worked for Cornerstone Care Solutions Ltd as a bookkeeper was found to be self-employed, so the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear her unfair dismissal claim. The respondent's costs application was also refused.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Key facts
- The claimant responded to a job advert for a bookkeeper and started work on 5 April 2019.
- The contract documents bore hallmarks of an employment contract including the phrase 'offer of employment'.
- The tribunal found the claimant was self-employed and not an employee or worker.
- The tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the claims.
- The respondent's application for costs was refused.
Timeline
-
Claimant started work
Claimant accepted an offer to work with the respondent as a bookkeeper providing remote office support.
-
Claimant stopped working
The claimant worked with the respondent until a date in March 2021.
-
Preliminary hearing day 1
Two-day hearing to determine employment status.
-
Preliminary hearing day 2 and judgment
Tribunal found claimant was self-employed and dismissed claims for lack of jurisdiction.
-
Written reasons provided
Respondent requested written reasons which were provided on 4 July 2022.
-
Costs application hearing
Employment Judge Hay refused the respondent's application for costs.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was an employee, worker, or self-employed, as only employees and workers can bring certain claims like unfair dismissal to an employment tribunal.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's case because it had no jurisdiction. The key reason was that the claimant was self-employed, not an employee or worker. The respondent's application for costs was also refused because the claim was not brought vexatiously or without reasonable prospect of success.
Lessons & takeaways
- Check your employment status carefully before bringing a claim – the contract wording is not decisive; the reality of the working relationship matters.
- If you are self-employed, you generally cannot bring claims like unfair dismissal or wrongful dismissal to an employment tribunal.
- Even if a contract uses employment-like language, the tribunal will look at the actual working arrangements to determine status.
- A costs application is unlikely to succeed if the claim was arguable and required a two-day hearing to resolve.
What this case shows in practice
This case is a reminder that the label on a contract does not determine employment status. The claimant, an accountant who worked remotely as a bookkeeper for Cornerstone Care Solutions Ltd, believed she was an employee because the offer letter used phrases like 'offer of employment'. However, the tribunal looked at the reality of the working relationship and concluded she was self-employed. As a result, the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear her unfair dismissal claim.
What the losing side could have done differently
The claimant might have avoided this outcome by seeking legal advice on her employment status before issuing proceedings. A preliminary hearing on jurisdiction was necessary, which took two days and involved four witnesses. The respondent, although successful, was refused costs because the tribunal found the claim was not brought unreasonably – the contract wording gave the claimant an arguable case.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This case highlights the importance of understanding the difference between employee, worker, and self-employed status. For individuals in similar roles, it is crucial to examine not just the contract but also day-to-day control, financial risk, and whether there is an obligation to provide and accept work. The tribunal's refusal to award costs also shows that bringing a borderline claim is not automatically penalised, provided it has some reasonable basis.
Similar cases
Self-employed surveyor's employment claim struck out: no reasonable prospect of success
A chartered surveyor who worked for Clements Agency Limited for nearly 30 years on a self-employed basis had his claim for unfair dismissal and discrimination struck out. The tribunal found he had no reasonable prospect of proving he was an employee.
Costs refused against unrepresented claimant whose claim was struck out
A tribunal has refused a costs application by First Rail Holdings Limited against a former employee whose unfair dismissal claim was struck out, finding his genuine belief in the claim meant he did not act vexatiously.
Finance Officer found to be a worker, not an employee: status ruling opens door to some claims
A tribunal ruled that a finance officer who worked for eight years on a freelance basis was a 'worker' but not an 'employee', meaning he can pursue claims for holiday pay and unlawful deductions but not unfair dismissal.
Sanctions law prevented maternity pay: dismissal claim struck out
A housekeeping assistant's unfair dismissal claim was struck out because UK sanctions on the company's owner made it illegal to pay her. The tribunal said the claim had no reasonable prospect of success.