Application of costs

[claireloupul]

Bump

[honeybee13]

Hello there.

 

Which aspects of your case are you looking for advice with please?

 

HB

[claireloupul]

Hello there.

 

Which aspects of your case are you looking for advice with please?

 

HB

 

Thanks honeybee,

Basically I have a application of costs hearing and I need to know what happens, they have said its a public hearing and I'm really scared. I don't know what to expect or what will happen.

I am starting to write my statement now. Will the other side be able to bring witnesses, do I send off my statement and bundle before hand?

Thanks in advance

[claireloupul]

Anyone?? Thanks

[Pusillanimous]

hi there I have my court case for the 25th October,

Any advice would be great!

 

There's an article here about the new rules:

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

The new rules, in force since 29 July 2013, have seen a change in terminology in relation to both scenarios. While the circumstances in which a costs order must be made are no less onerous, the scope for a tribunal to exercise its discretion and award costs in other cases could be said to have been increased.

The original test of a party having acted vexatiously, abusively etc. remains but is now accompanied by an option to award costs where any claim made in the proceedings by a party had no reasonable prospect of success. Furthermore, costs may also now be awarded against a party that has been in breach of any order or practice direction or where a hearing has been postponed or adjourned on the application of a party (usually at short notice).

-----

http://www.shoosmiths.co.uk/client-resources/legal-updates/Employment-tribunal-costs-difficulties-of-recovery-6164.aspx

[claireloupul]

There's an article here about the new rules:

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

The new rules, in force since 29 July 2013, have seen a change in terminology in relation to both scenarios. While the circumstances in which a costs order must be made are no less onerous, the scope for a tribunal to exercise its discretion and award costs in other cases could be said to have been increased.

The original test of a party having acted vexatiously, abusively etc. remains but is now accompanied by an option to award costs where any claim made in the proceedings by a party had no reasonable prospect of success. Furthermore, costs may also now be awarded against a party that has been in breach of any order or practice direction or where a hearing has been postponed or adjourned on the application of a party (usually at short notice).

-----

http://www.shoosmiths.co.uk/client-resources/legal-updates/Employment-tribunal-costs-difficulties-of-recovery-6164.aspx

 

hi there, thank you I am aware of the above and the chances of costs been awarded because of the postponement and withdrawal of the claim.

To be honest I do have all supporting evidence and I went through my bundle yesterday and can put forward a strong case.

also I dont think its as cut and dry situation where you postpone and withdraw you will get costs awarded as in derwents case.

[steampowered]

Hi claireloupul,

 

Technically all Employment Tribunal and all court hearings are public (unless there is an order to the contrary). Realistically this does not make much difference for standard cases. This is nothing to worry about, it is pretty unlikely anyone will be sitting in on the case. You sometimes see law students and the like though I doubt they would be interested in a costs hearing.

 

Have you received any directions from the ET about filing evidence/statements/bundles?

[claireloupul]

Hi claireloupul,

 

Technically all Employment Tribunal and all court hearings are public (unless there is an order to the contrary). Realistically this does not make much difference for standard cases. This is nothing to worry about, it is pretty unlikely anyone will be sitting in on the case. You sometimes see law students and the like though I doubt they would be interested in a costs hearing.

 

Have you received any directions from the ET about filing evidence/statements/bundles?

 

Thanks for that.

I received the et letter with the date on and stating if I wish to send a bundle I must do before 7 days of the trial.

Thanks

[SweetLorraine]

Hi claireloupul,

 

it might be worth establishing whether your hearing will be heard under the old rules or the new rules especially if the new rules give the Respondent a little more chance of success. (I'd imagine it might be under the 'old' rules - but the Respondent's might try it on with the new rules if it gives them a competitive edge).

 

With regards the bundle - do you and the Respondent have to agree one for this hearing or can you submit your own bundle? (I don't know).

Edited October 9, 2013 by SweetLorraine

[SweetLorraine]

....another thought (seeking advice from those with a legal background really),

 

the Respondent's apparently 'warned' claireloupul about a costs application before the second hearing, yet did not supply the claimant with any information on figures etc; before the hearing. Surely that cannot be considered reasonable behaviour (i.e. a valid warning) if the figures have not been supplied beforehand?

[claireloupul]

Hi clareloupul,

 

it might be worth establishing whether your hearing will be heard under the old rules or the new rules especially if the new rules give the Respondent a little more chance of success. (I'd imagine it might be under the 'old' rules - but the Respondent's might try it on with the new rules if it gives them a competitive edge).

 

With regards the bundle - do you and the Respondent have to agree one for this hearing or can you submit your own bundle? (I don't know).

I asked the tribunal and I just have to take my bundle and copys on the day.

its going to go on the new rules.

[Pusillanimous]

clairloupul Other than reminding the tribunal they have the prerogative to take your means into consideration if they decide costs are applicable, then there is not a lot more you can do. You could still continue to offer the other party, say £500 in instalments as a fair compromise, which they might accept if they think they might get nothing at all. Don't forget to mark it 'without prejudice save as to costs'. This is a safety net if they try to add on £1,500 for going ahead with the costs hearing. You can then reveal the offer to the tribunal on the grounds you made a reasonable offer based on your means, to avoid the costs hearing and therefore the additional claim should be disallowed.

[claireloupul]

clairloupul Other than reminding the tribunal they have the prerogative to take your means into consideration if they decide costs are applicable, then there is not a lot more you can do. You could still continue to offer the other party, say £500 in instalments as a fair compromise, which they might accept if they think they might get nothing at all. Don't forget to mark it 'without prejudice save as to costs'. This is a safety net if they try to add on £1,500 for going ahead with the costs hearing. You can then reveal the offer to the tribunal on the grounds you made a reasonable offer based on your means, to avoid the costs hearing and therefore the additional claim should be disallowed.

 

thank you thats really good advice.

[claireloupul]

I have actually emailed them today including copies of fathers sick notes for cancer, my work schedule and also a document explaining about leave.

I have also included a copy of my DMP so they can see how much debt im in and also that I have no means to payment so they also have that information.

[Pusillanimous]

Hopefully, they will have a heart. Appearing at a cost hearing can be hugely embarrassing and traumatic in that you have to reveal your private financial affairs to complete strangers and there is no harm in wanting to avoid it.

[claireloupul]

Thanks for that

[steampowered]

Thanks for that.

I received the et letter with the date on and stating if I wish to send a bundle I must do before 7 days of the trial.

Thanks

 

Anything which you want to be available for the Tribunal to look at needs to be in the bundle - this should include evidence of the illness, evidence of your financial circumstances and so on.

[SweetLorraine]

Could I ask for some advice just here?

 

'Without prejudice, save for costs' - a phrase that is often used - but what does it mean in layperson's terms please? What are the benefits and implications of using this phrase?

 

'Without prejudice....' - One side (using this phrase) can make an offer, or send some correspondence and the other side cannot use it's contents against their opponent in a hearing/court?

 

'....save for costs' - ???

[claireloupul]

Could I ask for some advice just here?

 

'Without prejudice, save for costs' - a phrase that is often used - but what does it mean in layperson's terms please? What are the benefits and implications of using this phrase?

 

'Without prejudice....' - One side (using this phrase) can make an offer, or send some correspondence and the other side cannot use it's contents against their opponent in a hearing/court?

 

'....save for costs' - ???

 

I was reading that as well that the prejudice to save costs cannot be used in court.

So if I did make a offer how can I prove to the judge that I have tried a remedy before hand and the case

Still went to court.

 

Also the respondant made a offer to me that wasn't a prejudice to save costs I imagine that they intend to use it in court like the costs warning.

 

Thanks for asking that.

[becky2585]

Without prejudice as a standalone title is rarely used. I would always mark it either "save as to costs" or "subject to contract" after the WP title.

 

That way WPSATC correspondence can be used in support of a costs application as it becomes relevant at the costs stage and can be viewed in court. It just can't be viewed when determining liability.

[claireloupul]

Without prejudice as a standalone title is rarely used. I would always mark it either "save as to costs" or "subject to contract" after the WP title.

 

That way WPSATC correspondence can be used in support of a costs application as it becomes relevant at the costs stage and can be viewed in court. It just can't be viewed when determining liability.

 

Thanks for that it makes sense

[steampowered]

There is a general legal principle that settlement offers cannot be used in evidence when the court is deciding on liability. The public policy behind this is that parties should be encouraged to negotiate settlement ofe their disputes without the need to go to court, and that these negotiations should be honest and conducted without people being afraid that statements made in negotiations will be used against them.

 

This principle applies whether or not the letter is headed 'without prejudice', although a proper heading should be used to avoid misunderstanding.

[SweetLorraine]

Thanks for the clarification becky2585 and steampowered.

 

Hi claireloupul - have the respondent's sent you their schedule of costs yet?

[claireloupul]

Thanks for the clarification becky2585 and steampowered.

 

Hi claireloupul - have the respondent's sent you their schedule of costs yet?

 

No sweetlorraine not as of yet.

I'm not entirely sure if they have to do they?

[SweetLorraine]

No sweetlorraine not as of yet.

I'm not entirely sure if they have to do they?

 

I don't know if they are required to provide the schedule before the hearing )but how else could you be afforded time to inspect/challenge the aggregated total figure?) Perhaps this is another point that other caggers could please clarify?

 

Also there has been some advice along the lines that respondents can either apply for the cost of external legal advice, or internal legal time spent preparing for the hearing, but not both sets of costs. It might be worth knowing for the hearing which rule/procedure sets out that distinction - could other caggers advise please?

 

Your hearing is on Friday 25th isn't it? How are you shaping up - feeling OK?