A costs order made by the tribunal under rule 78(1)(b) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 was within its powers, even though it capped the costs in favour of the appellant (the respondent below) in an amount that had not yet been precisely ascertained. The tribunal had been entitled to have regard to the claimant’s means and ability to pay, under rule 84; and although the precise amount of the cap was not stated as an exact figure, the costs order was sufficiently certain to comply with the requirement that the order should identify the ‘specified part’ of the costs to which it related.
The cap on the costs recoverable by the appellant did not usurp the jurisdiction of an employment judge or county court costs judge conducting a subsequent detailed assessment. That judge would still have to determine the amount payable under the costs order; the cap imposed by the tribunal did not determine the amount payable, only the maximum amount payable. The appeal therefore failed and the costs order stands. However, it would be better to specify any such cap as an exact sum, rather than as an amount that was only known as an approximation.
Citations:
[2019] UKEAT 0210 – 19 – 0412
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment, Costs
Updated: 27 November 2022; Ref: scu.650911
