The EAT considered whether the claimant had acted frivolously under the Rules which referred to awarding costs where a party had acted frivolously or vexatiously, and the Employment Appeal Tribunal took account of pre-proceedings conduct.
Held: For a costs order to be made against a party in an employment claim, it would seem that the party must at least know or to be taken to have known that his case is unmeritorious. Claimants had a responsibility to ascertain whether or not their claims were properly based and justifiable.
Judges:
Philips J
Citations:
[1978] IRLR 315
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Vaughan v London Borough of Lewisham and Others (Practice and Procedure : Costs) EAT 6-Jun-2013
EAT Practice and Procedure : Costs – Tribunal orders that Appellant should pay Respondents one-third of their costs (estimated prior to assessment at andpound;260,000) on the basis that the claim was misconceived . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.510702
