No appearance For the v The second and third respondents in person — 2021

This judgment concerns the respondents’ application for costs following the earlier merits hearing. The tribunal recorded that the underlying case had been heard over four days in April 2019 and that all complaints had been unanimously dismissed. It described the race discrimination case as unsupported by evidence and said the claimant had not come close to establishing a prima facie case. It also said the constructive unfair dismissal claim had not come close to showing the fundamental breach needed to found such a claim, and that the claimant’s actions around and after leaving the first respondent were inconsistent with her allegations.

Applying Rules 75 and 76 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure, the tribunal held that the threshold for considering a costs order was met because the claimant had acted unreasonably in bringing the proceedings and because the claim had no reasonable chance of success. It noted that the claimant was a litigant in person, that she had not engaged with the costs application, and that she had failed to attend the hearing without explanation or any written response. The tribunal also took account of the respondents’ detailed warning letters, including advice as early as May 2018 that costs were likely to be around £20,000.

The tribunal accepted that the respondents’ schedule of costs totalled £28,764.03 for a four-day hearing involving race discrimination and constructive unfair dismissal, but it considered that total not unreasonable. It also noted there had been no deposit order, that a late strike-out application had been refused, and that it had no current information about the claimant’s means. Balancing those factors, the tribunal said it was just and appropriate to award costs on a compensatory basis only and ordered the claimant to pay half of the amount claimed, namely £10,000.