Claimant v Q and others — 2020

At the remote hearing on 18 March 2021, the tribunal dealt only with Messrs Stephensons' application for a costs order against R1 and R2 and the claimant's application for reconsideration of the judgment of 2 and 3 December 2020. It refused both applications. The reasons note that the underlying merits judgment had largely gone for the respondents, save for a modest holiday pay element.

On costs, the tribunal held that the wasted costs application did not meet the rule 77 threshold of unreasonable conduct. It said the earlier litigation had been acrimonious, but that sharp language was not itself a basis for costs, and that the narrow application did not cross the threshold. It added that, if it had to consider the interests of justice, it would not have ordered costs against respondents who had acted in person and had succeeded on the substantive issues apart from holiday pay.

On reconsideration, the claimant relied on further medical and financial material, including a September 2018 CBT therapist letter, a 2019 Communicourt assessment, and Universal Credit material from 2020 and 2021. The tribunal accepted that she had been told in August 2020 that she had limited capability for work, but found that the new material did not provide clinical medical evidence warranting a different finding. It also accepted that her finances were tight, but held that the additional documents did not justify revisiting the earlier costs decision. The claimant's application for reconsideration was therefore refused.