Case 1400213/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Paul Williamson v Pic PR — 2025
- Case reference
- 1400213/2024
- Decision date
- 28 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rayner Representation
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Paul Williamson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Rayner, sitting at Southampton on 11 April 2025, found that the claimant Mr Paul Williamson had been wrongfully dismissed by the respondent Pic PR. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay damages for wrongful dismissal of £2,916.67, representing one month's gross pay, taxable in the claimant's hands.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had breached the claimant's contract of employment by failing to pay him commission, and awarded a further £200.00 in damages for that breach. The total sum payable to the claimant was £3,116.67.
The judgment is a short record of orally given decisions; written reasons were not provided in the document, and no legal tests were expressly cited in the written judgment itself.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | Tribunal awarded damages of £2,916.67 (one month's gross pay, taxable in the claimant's hands). | Upheld | — | £2,917 |
| Breach of contract | Respondent breached the contract by failing to pay commission; damages of £200.00 awarded. | Upheld | — | £200 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,117
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.