Employment tribunal help

davey9998

Edited this post

marybelle01

It is almost unheard of for a tribunal to award legal costs. But yes, in other courts this is far more likely to happen if you lose.

If the employer settles before the tribunal then yes, it is fair that the solicitor charges you what you agreed to pay! That's the risk you take, and the risk they are taking that they won't get paid at all!

I don't think anyone can tell you why the solicitor is suggesting this, except of course, the solicitor.

davey9998

Ok thanks. In the

marybelle01

Sorry - can't help with that because it depends on what the costs incurred are - but I would say that thousands rather than hundreds are more realistic. Can't the solicitor advise on this?

dharm999

I think the situation may be changing, for the better in my opinion. We have recently won a number of ETs, and have been awarded costs whenever we have applied for them. I detect a definite shift in the attitude of ETs to award costs. A few years ago we wouldnt have bothered applying for costs, but given the increase in frivolous cases, we have started to apply for them, and have been successful every time we have applied. andwe aret talking about a few hundred pounds either.

To the OP, if you're case is strong then I cant see you would have costs awarded you, but if your solicitor has doubts I would think carefully about proceeding with the ET. I'm not trying to scare you, just think carefully.

marybelle01

dharm999 wrote: »

I think the situation may be changing, for the better in my opinion. We have recently won a number of ETs, and have been awarded costs whenever we have applied for them. I detect a definite shift in the attitude of ETs to award costs. A few years ago we wouldnt have bothered applying for costs, but given the increase in frivolous cases, we have started to apply for them, and have been successful every time we have applied. andwe aret talking about a few hundred pounds either.

To the OP, if you're case is strong then I cant see you would have costs awarded you, but if your solicitor has doubts I would think carefully about proceeding with the ET. I'm not trying to scare you, just think carefully.

What is the basis for this claim? It flies in the face of all professional opinion about employment tribunals and your posting history indicates no such professional expertise. And BTW, the OP was actually asking about civil courts for damages, not employment tribunals. In civil courts the norm is that the losing side pays costs - employment tribunals are the exception.

dharm999

Marybelle01

Firstly apologies I misread the bit about courts and thought the OP was asing about ETs. Secondly, you're right I dont have a professional qualification and therefore I can only go by my experience of tribunals we have been involved in. I have no reason to exaggerate or lie, I'm simply stating my experience of what I know has happened in ETs we have been involved in. We may be a huge exception to what normally happens in ETs, I dont know, but from speaking to the HR professional we use for ETs, they are seeing more successful requests for costs, so I suspect that we aren't alone. And I re-iterate my original assertion that it is about time that claimants who bring frivolous cases and cases without any merit on the off chance of getting some money are brought to task. Why should they not pay for trying it on? Hopefully that will discourage someone else from bringing a case in the future. The sooner claimants are forced to pay to bring an ET the better. We spend too much money and time defending cases that are a complete waste of time, and I am certain if claimants had to pay something up front the majority of cases would simply disappear.

marybelle01

dharm999 wrote: »

Marybelle01

Firstly apologies I misread the bit about courts and thought the OP was asing about ETs. Secondly, you're right I dont have a professional qualification and therefore I can only go by my experience of tribunals we have been involved in. I have no reason to exaggerate or lie, I'm simply stating my experience of what I know has happened in ETs we have been involved in. We may be a huge exception to what normally happens in ETs, I dont know, but from speaking to the HR professional we use for ETs, they are seeing more successful requests for costs, so I suspect that we aren't alone. And I re-iterate my original assertion that it is about time that claimants who bring frivolous cases and cases without any merit on the off chance of getting some money are brought to task. Why should they not pay for trying it on? Hopefully that will discourage someone else from bringing a case in the future. The sooner claimants are forced to pay to bring an ET the better. We spend too much money and time defending cases that are a complete waste of time, and I am certain if claimants had to pay something up front the majority of cases would simply disappear.

So in fact you cannot support your statement and you are on the employers side?? So very objective and still not what supporting the general facts of a tribunal??? I don't see any reason why the OP should be listening to you.

Uncertain

marybelle01 wrote: »

So in fact you cannot support your statement and you are on the employers side?? So very objective and still not what supporting the general facts of a tribunal??? I don't see any reason why the OP should be listening to you.

I would agree that is is becoming SLIGHTLY more common for costs to be awarded against an unsuccessful claimant at an ET but it is still rare.

The case needs to be so weak that it should never have been brought or obviously malicious. The claimant will get a clear warning from the judge at a pre hearing if this is possibility.

I'm getting a bit out of date but I think costs are capped at around £8K but it is incredibly rare for anything like this to be awarded.

None of that stops the respondents solicitors from making intimidatory threats about seeking costs even when they know full well that they have no realistic chance of being awarded. In my view this practice should constitute professional misconduct.

dharm999

Marybelle

I'm not really sure what you're problem is. I think i have been perfectly clear and reasonable. I have said that my view is based on my experience, and no doubt your view is based on your experience. My statement about the award of costs is based on my experience, and in my experience it is becoming more common. As I said before, maybe my experience is unusual, but from talking to the HR professional we use, he is seeing more awards as well. So not all professionals have the view that costs awards are as unusual as you say.

I'm not sure why its relevant what side my view is coloured by. The OP was asking about the risks of costs being awarded against them. Their solicitor was giving them a number of options including one of going to court and the OP was concerned about costs. I misread the OP, and I said that. However my view of costs awards for ETs remains the same, they are becoming more frequent in my experience, and that is indisputable, as that is based on cases we have been involved in. Your expereince is different but I am not arguing that your view is wrong so why argue my view is wrong? I don't understand the need to belittle.

As a matter of interest for me, is your experience of costs awards different to mine? Are you seeing an increase? I'm not trying to bait, but am genunely interested, maybe we are just the exception to the general rule you state.

However this is hijacking the OPs thread, and maybe to discuss this further we should start a different thread about cost awards in ETs.