Case 6021232/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Rema Pall v Capita People Solutions — 2025
- Case reference
- 6021232/2024
- Decision date
- 19 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge England Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Rema Pall
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim by Miss Rema Pall against Capita People Solutions was listed for a final hearing on 7 May 2025, but neither party attended and no evidence had been filed. The respondent had not filed an ET3, and by email dated 5 February 2025 it said it was not the employer, that a school was the correct employer, and that it had been told a COT3 settlement was being prepared.
The tribunal wrote to the claimant on 22 April 2025 asking for the respondent’s correct name and address, but she did not reply. After the hearing link was sent, she said she had received the tribunal’s letter and had been unable to provide the legal address of the respondent, so she believed the hearing would not proceed. She later confirmed that she would not be attending, and there was no further correspondence on file.
Judge England struck out the claim for unpaid wages and/or notice pay because it had not been actively pursued. The judgment records that the claim was for £832 and notes that it appeared not to be actively pursued, potentially because it had been settled. No merits finding or award was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment describes the claim as for unpaid wages and/or notice pay. It was struck out because it had not been actively pursued, so the tribunal did not determine the merits. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 61
- not actively pursued
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.