Case 1301221/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Olumide Amudipe v RG8 Group Limited and 2 others — 2022
- Case reference
- 1301221/2022
- Decision date
- 14 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge J Jones Representation
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Mr Olumide Amudipe
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr Olumide Amudipe, brought a claim for unlawful deduction from wages against RG8 Group Limited, RG8 FM Limited and RG8 MG Limited. The hearing took place at Birmingham by remote video conferencing on 14 October 2022 before Employment Judge J Jones, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondents not appearing.
The tribunal did not determine the merits of the wages complaint. It held that the claim was struck out because it had not been lodged within the time prescribed by section 23 Employment Rights Act 1996, and the tribunal said it did not have jurisdiction to hear it.
No monetary award was made. The judgment expressly states that there had been no determination of the merits of the complaint.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Struck out because the claim was not lodged within the time prescribed by section 23 Employment Rights Act 1996; the tribunal stated there was no determination of the merits. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 23 Employment Rights Act 1996
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.