Case 2301572/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A Wrona v Kingspride Investments Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2301572/2020
- Decision date
- 11 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs A Wrona
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting alone by telephone before Employment Judge R F Powell on 11 February 2021, dealt with the case on the basis of the respondent's admissions at paragraphs 18 and 19 of its grounds of resistance and the parties' consent. No liability dispute was determined in the judgment beyond those admissions.
The tribunal held that the breach of contract claim for failure to pay one week's salary was well founded and ordered the respondent to pay the claimant net damages of £361.24. It also held that the breach of contract claim for failure to pay accrued holiday pay was well founded and ordered the respondent to pay net damages of £147.78.
The judgment does not record any separate award for unfair dismissal, age discrimination, unlawful deductions, or working time claims. The only monetary figures recorded in the judgment are the two net damages awards, which together total £509.02.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Claim for failure to pay one week's salary; tribunal found it well founded and ordered net damages of £361.24. | Upheld | — | £361 |
| Breach of contract | Claim for failure to pay accrued holiday pay; tribunal found it well founded and ordered net damages of £147.78. | Upheld | — | £148 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £509
- 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.