Case 2401334/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P A O’Brien v Macdonald Hotels — 2025
- Case reference
- 2401334/2024
- Decision date
- 8 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Barker
- Venue
- Liverpool
- Panel members
- Ms M Plimley, Ms P Owen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P A O’Brien
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard in Liverpool on 7 July 2025 before Employment Judge Barker, sitting with Ms M Plimley and Ms P Owen. The claimant did not attend, and the respondent was represented by Mr Wheaton, counsel. The judgment records that the claimant's claims were dismissed by reason of his non-attendance, without any separate findings on the merits of the pleaded issues.
The respondent applied for its costs of the hearing, but that application was refused. The written record also states that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the note on the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Dismissed because the claimant did not attend the hearing; the judgment does not give separate merits reasons for this claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Dismissed because the claimant did not attend the hearing; the judgment does not give separate merits reasons for this claim. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Other | Used for the listed right-to-be-accompanied issue; dismissed because the claimant did not attend the hearing, with no separate merits analysis in the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because the claimant did not attend the hearing; the judgment does not give separate merits reasons for this claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.