Case 2500487/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Paul Mark Kronbergs v Elstone Engineering Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2500487/2023
- Decision date
- 7 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Jeram
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Paul Mark Kronbergs
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Jeram issued judgment under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, and the hearing listed for 26 July 2023 was cancelled. The claimant, Paul Mark Kronbergs, succeeded on his claims of unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal and holiday pay against Elstone Engineering Limited.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £16,306.58 in total. The judgment broke that figure down as £12,766.55 for unfair dismissal, £2,596.00 for wrongful dismissal, and £944.03 for holiday pay. The extracted text does not set out any further reasoning or a separate breakdown of the unfair dismissal award into basic and compensatory elements.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states the claimant's unfair dismissal claim succeeded and awards £12,766.55 for that claim. The extracted text does not split this sum into basic and compensatory elements. | Upheld | — | £12,767 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment states the claimant's wrongful dismissal claim succeeded and awards £2,596.00 for that claim. | Upheld | — | £2,596 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states the claimant's holiday pay claim succeeded and awards £944.03 for that claim. | Upheld | — | £944 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £16,307
- 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.