Self-employed quality management consultant fails to prove employment status for unfair dismissal claim
A self-employed consultant who worked for Shekinah Consultants Limited and Martec Limited was unable to establish he was an employee or worker, leading to the dismissal of his unfair dismissal and holiday pay claims.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was engaged as a self-employed consultant under a Short Form Consultancy Agreement from 25 February 2013 to 23 March 2021.
- The claimant invoiced the first respondent for his work and declared his income as self-employment on tax returns.
- The claimant referred to himself as a self-employed Senior Consultant in an email dated 27 January 2020.
- The claimant had the right to refuse additional work and did so on at least one occasion.
- The IR35 CEST tool indicated the claimant was employed for tax purposes, but the tribunal found this not determinative of employment status.
- The tribunal found no contract between the claimant and the second respondent.
Timeline
-
Consultancy agreement signed
The claimant signed a Short Form Consultancy Agreement with the first respondent, Shekinah Consultants Ltd, to provide quality management services.
-
Agreement between respondents
A similar Short Form Consultancy Agreement was signed between the first and second respondents for the claimant's services.
-
Claimant confirms self-employed status
In an email to the first respondent, the claimant stated he was a self-employed Senior Consultant and not a Martec employee.
-
Engagement ended
The consultancy agreement between the claimant and the first respondent ended.
-
First hearing day
The hearing commenced via video but was adjourned to allow the claimant to disclose tax returns.
-
Full merits hearing
The tribunal heard evidence and submissions on the claimant's employment status and claims.
-
Judgment issued
The tribunal dismissed all claims, finding the claimant was self-employed and not an employee or worker.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was an employee or worker of either respondent, and thus entitled to bring claims for unfair dismissal and holiday pay.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims against both respondents.
- The claimant was engaged under a Short Form Consultancy Agreement, invoiced for his work, and declared his income as self-employment on tax returns.
- He referred to himself as a self-employed Senior Consultant in an email and had the right to refuse additional work, which he did on at least one occasion.
- The IR35 CEST tool indicated employment for tax purposes, but the tribunal found this not determinative of employment status.
- No compensation was awarded as the claims were dismissed.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you work as a self-employed contractor, your actual working relationship and how you present yourself (e.g., on tax returns) will be key to determining your employment status.
- Having a written consultancy agreement that reflects self-employment and invoicing for services can strongly support a finding that you are not an employee.
- The IR35 tax status tool is not conclusive for employment rights purposes; tribunals will look at the full picture of the working relationship.
- If you want to bring employment claims, you must first establish that you are an employee or worker – a tribunal cannot hear claims like unfair dismissal if you are genuinely self-employed.
This case shows how important it is to understand your employment status before bringing a claim. The claimant, a quality management consultant, had worked for Shekinah Consultants Limited and Martec Limited for eight years under a consultancy agreement. He invoiced for his work, declared himself self-employed on tax returns, and even referred to himself as a self-employed Senior Consultant in an email. When his engagement ended, he argued he was actually an employee and brought claims for unfair dismissal and holiday pay.
What the tribunal decided
The tribunal examined the full picture of the working relationship. It noted that the claimant had a written consultancy agreement, invoiced for his services, and had the right to refuse work – which he did on at least one occasion. The fact that the IR35 CEST tool suggested he was employed for tax purposes was not enough to override the actual terms and conduct. The tribunal found he was genuinely self-employed and therefore not entitled to bring employment claims.
What could have been done differently
The claimant might have succeeded if he could show he was treated as an employee in practice – for example, if he had no control over his work, was integrated into the business, or was subject to disciplinary procedures. However, the evidence pointed firmly towards self-employment. For respondents, this case reinforces the value of having clear consultancy agreements and ensuring that the working relationship matches the paperwork.
Why this matters
This case is a reminder that employment status is determined by the reality of the relationship, not just a single factor like a tax assessment. Anyone considering bringing an unfair dismissal claim should first check whether they are genuinely an employee or worker. If you have been operating as a self-employed contractor, you may not have the same legal protections as employees, even if you work exclusively for one client for many years.
Similar cases
Independent clerk to school appeals panels was a worker, not an employee — claims out of time
A long-serving independent clerk who worked for Royal Borough of Greenwich for 28 years was found to be a worker rather than an employee, meaning her unfair dismissal claim could not proceed. Her remaining claims for holiday pay and expenses were also dismissed as too late.
Working through a limited company? You may still be an employee
A tribunal ruled that a commissioning director with 24 years' service remained an employee even after switching to a consultancy agreement via his own limited company.
Remote support technician wins employee status and £15,758 after dismissal
A tribunal found that a remote support technician was an employee, not self-employed, and awarded £15,758.74 for unfair dismissal, including a 25% uplift for failure to follow the ACAS code.
Dismissed without a meeting or appeal: a conduct case with big reductions
A former employee of Fairview Grocers Limited was unfairly dismissed without any meeting or right of appeal, but his own conduct led to a 60% cut in compensation. He was awarded £3,752.89 in total.