Case 2400760/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P McMullen v Primary Care 24 (Merseyside) Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 2400760/2025
- Decision date
- 3 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leach
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P McMullen
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out the claim after giving the claimant an opportunity, by letter dated 31 July 2025, to make written representations or request a hearing on why strike-out should not follow for non-compliance with the Tribunal's order dated 17 March 2025. The claimant did not make representations in writing, did not make sufficient representations, and did not request a hearing.
On that basis, Employment Judge Leach ordered that the claim be struck out. The hearing listed for 5 and 6 February 2026 was vacated and did not take place. The judgment records no merits findings and no remedy award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that 'the claim is struck out' because the claimant did not comply with the Tribunal's order dated 17 March 2025 and did not make sufficient representations after the letter dated 31 July 2025. The judgment does not separate the strike-out by individual cause of action. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that 'the claim is struck out' because the claimant did not comply with the Tribunal's order dated 17 March 2025 and did not make sufficient representations after the letter dated 31 July 2025. The judgment does not separate the strike-out by individual cause of action. | Struck out | — | — |
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.