Case 2304503/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Mullen v P&O Ferries Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 2304503/2023
- Decision date
- 4 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ramsden
- Venue
- London South
- Panel members
- Mr A Peart, Ms E Whitlam
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Mullen
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal unanimously dismissed the Claimant's unauthorised deduction from wages complaint. It also dismissed two breach of contract complaints, but only because the Claimant withdrew them: one concerned payment in line with the collective bargaining agreement, and the other concerned redundancy pay in line with that agreement.
On the discrimination complaints, the Tribunal rejected the direct age discrimination allegation about not pooling the Claimant's role with his line manager, Simon King, for redundancy purposes. It upheld the direct age discrimination claim based on the Respondent's targeting of the Claimant's role for elimination in or around April 2023, and it also upheld the direct age discrimination claim based on the Respondent's failure to consider him for the role of Head of Capacity Management.
The age harassment complaint arising from Phil Hills' comment in the Respondent's announcement on 28 July 2022, including the phrase 'clear out the P&O Ancestors', was dismissed. The Tribunal also found that the Claimant's unfair dismissal claim was well-founded.
The judgment records that a separate remedy hearing was listed for 2 May 2025 in relation to the upheld discrimination claims and the unfair dismissal finding. No remedy figures are contained in this decision.
Claims and outcomes
8 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract claim in respect of not paying the Claimant in line with the collective bargaining agreement was dismissed upon withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract claim in respect of not paying the Claimant's redundancy pay in line with the collective bargaining agreement was dismissed upon withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Age discrimination | Direct age discrimination claim concerning failure to pool the Claimant's role with his line manager, Simon King, for redundancy purposes. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Age discrimination | Direct age discrimination claim concerning the Respondent's targeting of the Claimant's role for elimination in or around April 2023. | Upheld | Age | — |
| Age discrimination | Direct age discrimination claim concerning failure to consider the Claimant for the role of Head of Capacity Management. |
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.