Case 1301310/2021 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the Claimant’s Former Representative: Mr Martins, Employment Law Consultant For the v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 1301310/2021
- Decision date
- 5 December 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hughes
- Panel members
- Mr J Sharma, Mrs M Gola
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the Claimant’s Former Representative: Mr Martins, Employment Law Consultant For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a costs hearing held at Birmingham on 5 December 2023 before Employment Judge Hughes, with non-legal members Mr J Sharma and Mrs M Gola. The claimant, Mr I Ellahi, appeared in person; the respondent was represented by counsel, Mr R McLean.
The tribunal dismissed the respondent's application for costs against the claimant because it found there were no grounds to make a costs award. It also dismissed the respondent's application for wasted costs against the claimant's former representative, Mr Martins, for the same reason. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Respondent's application for costs against the claimant was dismissed because the tribunal found there were no grounds to award costs. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Respondent's application for wasted costs against the claimant's former representative, Mr Martins, was dismissed because the tribunal found there were no grounds to award wasted costs. | Dismissed | — | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.