Case 2203207/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms E Church v Cabinet Office — 2024
- Case reference
- 2203207/2022
- Decision date
- 19 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Akhtar
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms E Church
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case had been listed for a five-day final hearing from 18 to 23 July 2023. Around 20 minutes before the hearing was due to start, the Claimant emailed the tribunal saying she wished to withdraw her claim. The Respondent applied for costs, arguing that the last-minute withdrawal amounted to unreasonable conduct of the proceedings under rule 76(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013.
The Claimant explained that she had intended to obtain free legal representation for the final hearing, but was told late in the process that representation could not be provided. She said she had acted in good faith, attended the preliminary hearing, complied with deadlines, and ultimately felt unable to represent herself at the final hearing against a represented party.
The Tribunal accepted that the Claimant had intended to attend and pursue the case, and that her withdrawal was not based on concerns about the merits of the claim. Considering her conduct as a whole, the Tribunal found that the Respondent had not established that her conduct reached the threshold of unreasonable conduct. No order for costs was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment adjudicated the Respondent's costs application, not the underlying withdrawn claim. No order for costs was made. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- Rule 76 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- Rule 84 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- Power v Panasonic (UK) Ltd
- National Oilwell Varco UK Ltd v Van de Ruit
- Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council v Yerrakalva
- MacPherson v BNP Paribas (London Branch) (No 1)
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.