I recently acted for a respondent company in an employment tribunal case. The matter was brought by a claimant in person who consistently breached the case management orders, including the disclosure of vital documents only two days prior to the pre-hearing review (PHR).


The litigation was vexatious and misconceived, and for the purposes of the claim, counsel was successful in having the case dismissed at the PHR.



My concern relates to the unnecessary costs my client has been forced to incur in defending this litigation. A costs application was duly submitted at the close of the PHR, but this was swiftly refused by the chairman. The chairman cited her personal view that costs should not follow the event in the employment tribunal and how she hoped they would never do so. On that basis, my client has been left with a fairly substantial legal bill for a claim she ultimately had no choice but to defend.



When will the time come for the tribunal to shed such archaic misconceptions about costs? The claimant in the case rightly summarised the situation to my client on leaving the tribunal, when he flippantly remarked: 'Well, we're both losers then.'



Andrew King, trainee solicitor, Lennon & Co, Chesham, Bucks