Mrs G Oladoke v South West Yorkshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust — 2023

This document is a costs judgment determined on the papers in chambers on 20 September 2024, following the dismissal of the Claimant's eight complaints of direct race discrimination at a three-day hearing in November 2023 (written judgment 5 December 2023). The Respondent had sent a detailed costs warning letter on 23 August 2023 inviting the Claimant, who was legally represented throughout, to withdraw her claims as having no reasonable prospect of success. The Claimant did not engage with the costs application despite repeated opportunities to do so.

Applying Rules 76 and 84 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 and the principles in Yerrakalva v Barnsley MBC and Arrowsmith v Nottingham Trent University, the Tribunal found that it was unreasonable for the Claimant to present and pursue seven of the eight race discrimination complaints, the Tribunal considering that she must have known the underlying factual contentions to be inaccurate or baseless. One complaint (relating to Ms Hartland's alleged comment of 16 January 2023) was not found to have been unreasonably brought. The Tribunal did not deal in detail with the Respondent's secondary argument concerning an unfair dismissal claim and disclosure requests.

On amount, the Tribunal noted the Respondent's solicitors' costs were almost £40,000 with around £8,000 of counsel's fees, and considered reasonable defence costs at standard rates would be at least £25,000. Taking into account that one complaint was not unreasonably pursued (defence of which alone might have cost around £10,000), identified failures of communication on the Respondent's part, and the Claimant's likely ability to pay as a qualified nurse (no evidence of means having been provided), the Tribunal ordered the Claimant to pay £6,000 in costs.