Case 2200422/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Remi Hutson Ojo v Lalaland London Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2200422/2024
- Decision date
- 8 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Webster Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Remi Hutson Ojo
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in which the claimant, Remi Hutson Ojo, had presented a claim against Lalaland London Ltd. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge therefore determined part of the claim without a hearing under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages and ordered payment of £422.50 gross. The judgment records that the claimant’s remaining claims were not determined in this decision and would be dealt with at a further hearing.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment; the tribunal determined part of the claim only. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the claimant was awarded £422.50 gross for unauthorised deductions from wages. The remaining claims were listed for determination at a further hearing. | Upheld | — | £423 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £423
- across all upheld claims
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.