Case 2306601/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Matteo Capobianco v Mokarabia Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 2306601/2024
- Decision date
- 6 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge O’Neill Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Matteo Capobianco
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy consent under Rule 62 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024, Employment Judge O’Neill recorded that Matteo Capobianco’s claims for statutory redundancy payment, notice pay, holiday pay and outstanding wages succeeded. The judgment then states that, because the parties had agreed settlement terms accepted by the claimant, those claims were dismissed on the settlement recorded in the schedule.
The schedule provides for a settlement payment of £9,741.03 in full and final settlement of the claims before the tribunal and any related claims arising out of or in connection with the claimant’s employment by the respondent and/or its termination, subject to excepted claims relating to personal or industrial injury and the respondent’s pension scheme. Payment was to be made in two instalments: £3,500 by 4:00 pm on 22 July 2025 and £6,241.03 within 7 days of the settlement agreement, with a personal guarantee from Marco Zanetti if the respondent defaulted.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Settled | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Settled | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Settled | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Settled | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,741
- 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.