Case 2206715/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Luxury Time Mayfair Ltd T/a Signifiers — 2022
- Case reference
- 2206715/2021
- Decision date
- 21 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wade JUDGMENT
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not present an ET3 Grounds of Resistance. Regional Employment Judge Wade therefore determined the case on the papers under rule 21, without a hearing, having considered the ET1. The judgment records that the respondent had unlawfully discriminated against Mr Abayomi Olaleye because of his race and age, and that he had been unfairly dismissed.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to give written reasons for the dismissal and had made an unlawful deduction of wages. Those claims were recorded as part of the rule 21 judgment alongside the discrimination and unfair dismissal findings.
No remedy figure is recorded in this decision. Instead, the preliminary hearing listed for 4 February 2022 at 2pm was converted to a remedy hearing, and Mr Olaleye was ordered to file a Schedule of Loss by 28 January 2022 with a copy to the respondent.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | Race | — |
| Age discrimination | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | Age | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | Failure to give written reasons for dismissal. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 4 PDF on gov.uk
Published on gov.uk under the .
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.