Case 2603604/2019 · Employment Tribunal
(1) Mr G MacLean (2) Mr N McDonald (3) Mr J Onn v FS Operations Ltd and 3 others — 2020
- Case reference
- 2603604/2019
- Decision date
- 16 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Faulkner
Parties
5 namedClaimant
(1) Mr G MacLean (2) Mr N McDonald (3) Mr J Onn
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 8 September 2020, Employment Judge Faulkner sitting alone dismissed the unfair dismissal complaints brought by Mr G MacLean and Mr J Onn. The judgment states that the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear those claims.
The same judgment added Fitness Space (Franchise) Ltd as an additional respondent to the remaining complaints brought by all three Claimants. Those remaining complaints were not finally determined at this hearing and were directed to proceed to a final hearing, with case management orders to follow separately.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Mr G MacLean's unfair dismissal complaint was dismissed at a preliminary hearing because the Tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Mr J Onn's unfair dismissal complaint was dismissed at a preliminary hearing because the Tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear it. | 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.