0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

record employment tribunal costs award

12 August 2011

Unlike litigation in the civil courts, costs orders in the employment tribunals are the exception rather than the rule. An employer successfully defending a claim against it can only recover its legal costs of doing so if it can show that the claimant behaved “vexatiously, abusively, disruptively or otherwise unreasonably” or that bringing the case was “misconceived.” In reality the employment tribunals award costs in only 0.2% of cases, and even then the level of award is often much lower than the legal costs incurred.

However, in a recent case an employment tribunal awarded costs of £100,000 against a former executive of Pertemps after she was unsuccessful in a sexual harassment case against her former employer. It is an encouraging example of an employment tribunal using a costs order in a case which, according to one newspaper, it found to be “vexatious, frivolous and [a waste of] the court’s time.”

related opinions

World Menopause Day

To mark this, ACAS has produced new guidance for managing the menopause at work, providing advice on the symptoms and potential impact of the menopause and the types of support that can be offered.

View blog

Sexual Harassment in the workplace – consequences of getting it wrong

A partner at a Magic Circle law firm has this week been ordered to pay £235,000 in fines and costs by a disciplinary tribunal, having been found guilty of breaching his professional obligations.

View blog

High Court finds against WASPI women

The High Court has rejected the judicial review claim brought by the campaign group BackTo60 against the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP).

View blog

When does misconduct by a professional amount to professional misconduct?

The Court of Appeal has considered what amounts to professional conduct for the purposes of the MHPS in the case of Idu –v- The East Suffolk & North Essex NHS Foundation Trust.
The allegations raised against the Appellant surgeon included, amongst others, refusals to follow management instructions and inappropriate (rude, uncivil, and, on occasions, aggressive) verbal and written communications.

View blog

mailing list sign up



Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up