Practice and Procedure: Costs – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity
On appeal against a wasted costs order made against the opposing party’s solicitor, the appeal was allowed.
It was common ground that the Employment Judge made no positive findings on causation and gave no reasons for considering such an order ‘right’. The jurisdiction to make a wasted costs order extends only to impugned conduct that has caused a waste of costs and only to the extent of such wasted costs, demonstration of a causal link being essential. These findings were not implicit in the particular circumstances. The Employment Judge erred in failing adequately to deal with causation and the justice of such an order.
Separately, there was procedural unfairness. Given the fluid and changing nature of the application, the paying solicitors did not have proper or adequate notice of its basis that would enable them to respond. By the time of the final hearing of the application (which had taken four days separately listed), the comments and conduct of the Employment Judge led to the appearance of bias, and the Employment Judge should have recused himself.
Simler DBE P J
[2016] UKEAT 0442 – 14 – 2107
Bailii
England and Wales
Employment, Costs, Legal Professions
Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570383