Mr S Verma v Respondent — 2019

The tribunal considered the respondent’s application dated 1 May 2019 for wasted costs against Glen Solicitors Limited. The underlying ET1 had included claims for unfair dismissal, age discrimination, unpaid wages and notice pay, and the reasons note that the age discrimination claim was subsequently dismissed. At the preliminary hearing on 27 July 2018, the claimant’s representative made no request for an interpreter for the final hearing.

At the final hearing on 11 April 2019, the claimant’s consultant said a Punjabi interpreter would be required, but there was no correspondence showing that the issue had been raised earlier. The tribunal found it was not in the interests of justice for the hearing to continue, that the day was wasted, and that unnecessary costs had been incurred. Applying Rule 80 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 and the three-stage test in Ridehalgh v Horsefield, the tribunal found Glen Solicitors Limited had acted negligently by failing to inform the tribunal that an interpreter would be needed.

Because no explanation was provided for that failure, the tribunal granted the wasted costs application. Glen Solicitors Limited was ordered to pay the respondent £3,135.60, as set out in paragraphs 1.10 and 1.11 of the respondent’s application.