Jump to content


Pending Costs Hearing, Please Help


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2775 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

A friend of mine (X) is being taken to court by his employer (L) for costs resulting from a withdrawn Tribunal Claim.

The claim for costs is for over £5000 of which 'X' can not afford a penny owing to a mortgage and juggling a busy family life etc.

 

This all started in December 2011 when X was docked 9 hours from his annual leave for having Christmas day off. NEVER in the past 10 yrs+ has this been the case.

You normally have Christmas day off, no deductions from annual leave whatsoever.

 

X Approached the union and was advised that the company had acted unlawfully as they had breached an implied term of the contract as hours were never docked for Christmas day so why the change now?

 

X tells me that he continued to have meetings with both union reps and management regarding this and it concluded in the Union recommending ET. X believed a ET was some kind of procedural remedy and was not told of the attached risks. A month or two later the union rep approached x and told him that the case will not be continued because representation could not be secured.

 

Now X has received 2 letters, 1 from Brabners Chaffe Street Solicitors and the other from ET setting a costs hearing date for late November. The Application For Costs reads:

 

 

What are his options please? Thanks

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

1. We are instructed by the respondent, (L), in this matter.

 

2. We refer to the tribunals notice of withdrawal of claim dated 6th July 2012, which states that the claimant has withdrawn his claim.

 

3. Please accept this letter as the respondents application for legal costs incurred in defending this matter, to be paid by the claimant pursuant to rule 40 of schedule 1

of the employment Tribunals (Constitution and rules of procedure) regulations 2004.

 

4. This application for costs is made on the following grounds:-

 

a. The Claimant has conducted proceedings vexatiously, abusively, disruptively or otherwise unreasonably, and/or

 

b. The bringing or conducting of the proceedings by the claimant was misconceived.

 

c. The respondent submits as follows:-

 

i. The Claimants ET1 form was lodged on the 13th April 2012

ii. The claimant is a member of unison. The claimants representative is Mr Smith. Mr Smith wrote to the respondant on 3rd May 2012 in respect of the Claimants

grievance appeal decision.

iii. The Respondent's ET3 form was lodged on 14th May 20012.

iv. On the 1st June 2012 the tribunal issued a notice of hearing, listing the matter for hearing on 18th September 2012.

v. On the 25th June 2012 the Respondent made an application that this matter be listed for a telephone case management discussion, on the basis that

(and as per paragraphs 31 - 33 of the respondent's grounds of resistance) that the respondent did not understand the claimants pleaded case.

vi. On the 1st July 2012 the claimant wrote to the Tribunal withdrawing his claims. The reason for the withdrawal being that he had not yet had the benefit of legal advice

nor had he been successful in gaining representation for the hearing.

 

5. The respondent submits that the claimant has acted vexatiously, abusively, disruptively or otherwise unreasonably by issuing a legal claim in the Employment Tribunal,

then failing subsequently to prosecute that claim.

 

6. It is submitted that the claimants claim appears to have been issued vexatiously to cause disruption to the respondent's business.

 

7. It is submitted that the claimants case was misconceived. In his letter notifying the tribunal of his withdrawal of his claims, the claimant stated that the reasons for such withdrawal were that he had not yet had the benefit of legal advice nor had he been successful in gaining representation for the hearing listed for 18 Sep 2012.

 

8. The respondent has of course had to deal with the claim appropriately. This has resulted in significant amount of time and effort being spent on this matter, by both senior managers of

the respondent, and by its legal representatives. The respondent has today incurred legal costs totaling £5,408.40 (£4,507+VAT) in defending this matter. The respondent representatives current

hourly rates are as follows:

 

a. Parner:£310 per hour + VAT

b. associate: £195 per hour + VAT

c. assistant: £175 per hour + VAT

 

9. The respondent requests that the Tribunal makes an order that these costs pluss any costs of prosecuting this application be born by the claimant.

 

10. The respondent submits that the tribunal has discretion to make an order for the above costs without reference to a detailed assessment in the Count Court pursuant

to Rule 41 (1) (a).

 

11. The respondent is willing to attend a hearing to determine whether these costs be born by the claimant if the tribunal considers such a hearing is required.

 

12. We would respectfully ask that any hearing was listed for a time which would allow the respondents representatives (who are based in Liverpool) to travel to Watford

in good time. We would respectfully request that the tribunal lists any hearing for 14:00 if at all possible.

 

13. Whilst we have provided a copy of this application to the claimant (together with the reasons as to why our application is sought, and have advised the claimant that any objection to this application

must be sent to the tribunal office and us within 7 days of receipt of this application), we would be greatfull to the secretary to also inform the claimant of the matters listed in rule 11(4)(a) to © in accordance

with rule 11 (5).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have requested further assistance from the Site Team for you.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 9 months later...
Hi there just wondering what happened in this case?

 

 

Thanks

 

We will never know claire poster never returned.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then start your own thread claire here in the legal forum.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...