Mr N Stoyanov v B&M Retail Ltd — 2025

This is a reserved costs judgment by Employment Judge Benson, sitting alone in chambers on 29 August 2025. The respondent had applied for £9,342.55 in costs under rules 74(2)(a) and 74(2)(b) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024 following the refusal on 19 May 2025 of the claimant's application to amend his claim to include a public interest disclosure-based automatic unfair dismissal complaint.

The Judge accepted that the claimant had been advised by his union solicitors that the whistleblowing complaint did not have reasonable prospects of success, that he had been warned by the Tribunal and respondent of the difficulties with his amendment application, and that the application had no reasonable prospects of success. However, the Judge had regard to the claimant's status as a litigant in person at the time of the application, his Bulgarian nationality and English-language difficulties, his strong personal belief that his dismissal was related to health-and-safety disclosures, and his limited financial means (Debt Relief Order, modest assets, family responsibilities).

Applying AQ Ltd v Holden, the Judge concluded that lay people should not be judged by professional standards. Weighing the relevant factors, the Judge exercised her discretion against making any costs order. The respondent's application is refused. The substantive unfair dismissal claim was due to be relisted for hearing on 21-22 October 2025.