Case 2305102/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J Edwards v Gallium Fund Solutions Administration Limited Gallium Depositary — 2024
- Case reference
- 2305102/2023
- Decision date
- 30 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Emery REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms J Edwards
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at London South by CVP on 9 and 10 April 2024 before Employment Judge Emery. The claimant, Ms J Edwards, appeared in person and the respondent was represented by counsel. In the written judgment dated 30 April 2024, the tribunal recorded that reasons had been given orally at the hearing.
The tribunal held that all claims were not well founded. Those claims were unfair dismissal, unpaid wages, holiday pay and notice pay. Each of those claims was dismissed. The written record does not set out separate findings on liability, remedy, or any monetary award, and no split of compensation by claim was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal stated that the unfair dismissal claim was not well founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal stated that the claim for unpaid wages was not well founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal stated that the holiday pay claim was not well founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The tribunal stated that the notice pay claim was not well founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.