Case 2204185/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs D Wolff v Armila Capital Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2204185/2022
- Decision date
- 16 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Glennie Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs D Wolff
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Glennie issued a rule 21 judgment after no response had been received from Armila Capital Limited. The tribunal held that the claimant's complaints of unfair dismissal, entitlement to a redundancy payment, breach of contract (notice pay), unlawful deduction from wages, and non-payment of holiday pay were well founded.
The judgment did not decide remedy at that stage. It stated that remedies would be determined at the hearing listed to commence on 9 March 2023, with a revised three-hour time estimate.
The tribunal also directed the claimant to file and serve a signed witness statement and supporting documents by 2 March 2023. The respondent was permitted to participate in the remedy hearing only to the extent allowed by the judge.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Found well founded in a rule 21 judgment after no response was received from the Respondent. Remedies were listed to be decided at the hearing on 9 March 2023. | Upheld | — | — |
| Redundancy | Found well founded in a rule 21 judgment after no response was received from the Respondent. Remedies were listed to be decided at the hearing on 9 March 2023. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract claim described as notice pay. Found well founded in a rule 21 judgment after no response was received from the Respondent. Remedies were listed to be decided at the hearing on 9 March 2023. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Found well founded in a rule 21 judgment after no response was received from the Respondent. Remedies were listed to be decided at the hearing on 9 March 2023. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Non-payment of holiday pay was found well founded in a rule 21 judgment after no response was received from the Respondent. Remedies were listed to be decided at the hearing on 9 March 2023. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 21 of the Rules of Procedure
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.