Mr N Faulkner T/a The Drive Prep School

Case Summary

A teacher at an independent prep school claimed redundancy pay and notice pay following the sudden closure of the school after an Ofsted inspection. The tribunal found the claimant was an employee despite being paid on a self-employed basis, as the reality of the working relationship demonstrated sufficient control, integration, and employment characteristics. The tribunal awarded £6,471 redundancy pay and £4,000 pay in lieu of notice, totalling £10,471.

The tribunal found that despite the claimant being treated as self-employed for tax purposes, the reality of the working relationship demonstrated employee status. The claimant worked under the direct control of the respondent, was required to follow a timetable, attend inset days, complete mandatory courses, have lessons observed, provide cover work when absent, and use equipment provided by the respondent. She did not set her own hourly rate independently but negotiated increases, and did not receive employee benefits such as holiday pay or pension contributions. The substance of the relationship indicated employment rather than self-employment.

Use these claim-type pages to compare this decision with other published tribunal cases, outcome patterns, and visible award data.

• •employment status - whether claimant was an employee or self-employed
• •entitlement to redundancy payment under s.135 Employment Rights Act 1996
• •entitlement to notice pay under s.86 Employment Rights Act 1996
• •control and supervision by employer
• •provision of equipment and materials
• •attendance at mandatory training and inset days
• •absence of employee benefits such as holiday pay, sickness pay, pension

1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mrs B Groves Respondent: Mr N Faulkner t/a The Drive Prep School Heard at: London South (video/CVP) On: 6 May 2026 Before: Employment Judge Wright Representation: Claimant: In person initially and then represented by Ms Izquierdo a friend Respondent: In person JUDGMENT The claimant was an employee of the respondent for the purposes of s.230 Employment Rights Act 1996. That aspect of her claim succeeds. REASONS 1. The hearing started late. This was due to the claimant not being ready to commence the hearing and/or technical difficulties. When the hearing started, the claimant could not be heard. She then switched her camera off to preserve bandwidth. She was asked to switch her camera on, but did not do so. 2. The claimant was disconnected and an adjournment was taken in order for her to connect. The hearing resumed, however, there were still issues with the claimant’s connection/technology. The claimant was asked where she was and she said she was in South Africa. The hearing was paused whilst the position in respect of the state of South Africa was established. Fortunately, the Guidance: Taking and giving evidence by video link from abroad in UK court cases and tribunals confirmed that; individuals in South Africa can voluntarily give evidence from South Africa by video link in UK civil, commercial and administrative tribunals (either as a witness or when appealing a case). 3. The next issue was the claimant’s connection and her location. It appeared she was using her telephone to join the hearing and when she 2 was asked where she was as she appeared to be on a terrace. She said that her 92 year old mother had been taken ill, she had flown out to South Africa two days ago and she was in the hospital restaurant. As the claimant was in a public place, she was in effect broadcasting the hearing. That is not permitted and the claiman…