Case 3311799/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Mason v Capelli Studio Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 3311799/2020
- Decision date
- 29 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Lewis
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss M Mason
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment under the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The tribunal found that Miss M Mason had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered Capelli Studio Limited to pay damages of £3,780.00. The tribunal also found that she was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £4,882.50.
The tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,260.00. The judgment records the outcomes and sums awarded, but no further reasoning, evidence, or legal tests are set out in the extracted text. The total of the awards is £9,922.50.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment describes this as dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £3,780 |
| Redundancy | The judgment states the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and is entitled to a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £4,883 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment describes this as failure to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £1,260 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,923
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.