Single Homeless Project Ltd v Abu and Others (Practice and Procedure : Costs): EAT 27 Aug 2013

EAT Wasted costs – Tribunal did not (1) apply or give reasons in respect of the appropriate tests for wasted costs and (2) afford the Appellant an opportunity to respond to substantial written submissions and evidence put in by the Respondents. Value of guidance in Godfrey Morgan Solicitors v Cobalt Systems [2012] ICR 305 emphasised.
Costs and wasted costs – Tribunal did not apply the correct test concerning ability to pay. Arrowsmith v Nottingham Trent University [2012] ICR 159 and Vaughan v London Borough of Lewisham UKEAT/0533/12 applied.

David Richardson J
[2013] UKEAT 0519 – 12 – 2708
England and Wales


Updated: 22 November 2021; Ref: scu.516746