Defamation case taken by McKillen associate is thrown out

Project manager Frank Sinton made allegations against Qatari-owned Maybourne Hotels and four directors

Defamation allegations taken by a close associate of businessman Paddy McKillen against the Qatari-owned Maybourne Hotels group, whose highend properties include Claridge’s and the Connaught in London, have been thrown out by the UK’s High Court.

Project manager Frank Sinton, who has worked on a number of luxury hotel developments undertaken by Maybourne Hotels, sued the group and four individuals who are directors of the company.

Represented by the offices of high-profile Northern Irish lawyer Paul Tweed, Mr Sinton made allegations of libel, malicious falsehood and breach of data protection law against the defendants.

The action stemmed from a decision in early 2022 by the Maybourne Hotels board to withdraw access rights from Mr Sinton to the company’s offices and three of the group’s sites, including properties that were being developed in London and Nice.

That decision was made following allegations made against Mr Sinton, fellow project manager Ronnie Delaney, and Mr McKillen that they had acted inappropriately towards staff at the site in Nice and one in London.

An email was sent by Maybourne’s board to Mr McKillen and his secretary, as well Liam Cunningham, a director of a firm called Hume Street Management Consultants (HSMC), that is owned by Mr McKillen. HSMC was managing construction works at the relevant sites and also managing Claridge’s, the Connaught and another Maybourne property, the Berkeley.

Mr McKillen sold his 36pc stake in Maybourne Hotels to the family office of Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, who was formerly the Emir of Qatar, in 2015.

Mr McKillen was removed from the Maybourne Hotels board in 2022 and his relationship with the Qatari owners subsequently deteriorated.

A number of other individuals were also informed that Mr Sinton’s access had been suspended, while he claimed that dozens of construction workers at the hotel site in Nice – many of them

British – had also been informed of his access suspension.

Mr Sinton complained that one communication to a director of the French company that owns the hotel site in Nice stated that: “Frank Sinton is guilty of particularly serious reprehensible behaviour and, in view of the seriousness of his conduct and to protect all the people present at the Maybourne Riviera site, his access to the site should be suspended.”

He also complained of another message sent to an employee of a company connected to Maybourne Hotels that stated: “There is an investigation into Frank Sinton’s conduct that was much more serious than people can think and there is a possibility that the authorities would be informed.”

But the defendants applied for summary judgment in the case. They argued that in respect of his defamation claim, Mr Sinton had no real prospect of showing that one of the relevant letters caused or was likely to cause serious harm to his reputation.

Justice Martin Chamberlain has granted summary judgment to the defendants on the defamation and malicious falsehood claims made by Mr Sinton. He invited submissions in relation to the resolution of the data protection claim made by him.

He also noted that he could not draw “any firm conclusion” from the evidence Mr Sinton’s action was being funded by Mr McKillen, “let alone that it is actuated by an improper motive on Mr McKillen’s or Mr Sinton’s part”.