Mrs E Celik v Synnovis and Others: 2303999/2023 and 2304000/2023

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Case No 2303999/2023, 2304000/2023
Mrs Esra CelikClaimant(1) Synnovis (2) Charlotte Noronha (3) Clare Wigley (4) Hannah Gilbert (5) Kendra Williams (6) Angela Uchendu (7) Stephen Best (8) Tracey MareRespondent
Employment Judge MartinMr Dyson (instructed by Lay Representative) for claimantMr Gill (instructed by Counsel) for respondentDate 11 March 2025

JUDGMENT

The claim is struck out against respondents (2) to (8) above

REASONS

[1]This is a claim of unfair dismissal. The claimant has brought two claims arising out of the same dismissal and named all of the above respondents.[2]By letter dated 21 February 2020 Employment Judge Martin wrote to the claimant explaining that only her employer could be liable and inviting her to make any representations on the point.[3]In response, the claimant has argued, for example, that Mr Best took the decision to dismiss her and so he must be the employer, and that otherwise she would be without a remedy. That is not correct. Providing he was acting within the course of Case Number 2303999/2023 & 2304000/2023 Page 2 of 2 his employment then as a matter of law the actual employer is liable for any such decision on his part.[4]There appears to be no dispute that the first respondent is the correct employer. Accordingly any claims against the other respondents have no reasonable prospect of success. Employment Judge Fowell Date 16 May 2024 Case Number: 2303999/2023 1 of 1 © Crown Copyright 2025 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Ms E Celik Respondent: Synnovis Analytics LLP Heard at: London South (by video) On: 10 and 11 March 2025 Before: Employment Judge D Wright (sitting alone) Appearances For the claimant: Mr Dyson, Lay Representative For the respondent: Mr Gill, Counsel