Case 2600406/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Sprawson 1st v DPD Group UK Limited 2nd Respondent: F C Workforce Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2600406/2021
- Decision date
- 10 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phillips
- Venue
- Leicester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Sprawson 1st
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Leicester on 8 July 2022, Employment Judge Phillips sitting alone heard the parties' costs applications. The first respondent was represented; the claimant was represented by a solicitor; and the second respondent did not attend.
The written record records an order that the claimant pay the first respondent £1,750 in respect of legal costs. It also records that the first respondent's application for wasted costs against the claimant's legal representative was dismissed, as were the claimant's application for a costs order against the first respondent and the claimant's application for wasted costs against the first respondent's legal representatives.
The judgment notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. The record therefore sets out the dispositive costs orders, but not a detailed written explanation of the tribunal's reasoning.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal ordered the claimant to pay the first respondent £1,750 in respect of legal costs. | Upheld | — | £1,750 |
| Other | The first respondent's application for wasted costs against the claimant's legal representative was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The claimant's application for a costs order against the first respondent was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The claimant's application for wasted costs against the first respondent's legal representatives was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,750
- across all upheld claims
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.