Case 2201520/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Solley v Prosperity Capital Partners Ltd. — 2022
- Case reference
- 2201520/2022
- Decision date
- 30 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Elliott
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Solley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningIn this Rule 21 judgment, Employment Judge Elliott determined that it was not reasonably practicable for Mr D Solley to bring the breach of contract and holiday pay claims within time, that he presented the claim within such period as the tribunal considered reasonable, and that the tribunal therefore had jurisdiction to determine those claims.
On the merits, the tribunal held that Mr Solley was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered Prosperity Capital Partners Ltd to pay damages of £4,583.33. It also found that he was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,448.00.
The tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay Mr Solley’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £5,436.53. The combined monetary sum of the awards set out in the judgment is £12,467.86.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal held the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £4,583.33. | Upheld | — | £4,583 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,448.00. | Upheld | — | £2,448 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £5,436.53. | Upheld | — | £5,437 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £12,468
- 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.