Case 2207402/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Maxwell Valentine v LDG Capital Limited Heard: in private by CVP — 2022
- Case reference
- 2207402/2021
- Decision date
- 7 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Codd Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Maxwell Valentine
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMaxwell Valentine brought claims against LDG Capital Limited arising from alleged non-payment of notice, wages, holiday pay and a contractual bonus. The tribunal recorded that the respondent disputed being the correct employer and said the claimant had in fact been employed by LDG (Residential) Ltd, but the judge made no finding on the correct employer or on worker status because it was not necessary to do so.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment refers to failure to pay notice and a contractual bonus as part of the claim. No merits finding was made because the case was dismissed for being out of time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment refers to non-payment of wages for a three-month period. No merits finding was made because the case was dismissed for being out of time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment refers to non-payment of holiday pay. No merits finding was made because the case was dismissed for being out of time. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- not reasonably practicable
- reasonable period
- s.207B ERA 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.