Miss Sarah Louise v Luck AND Hanson Quarry Products Europe Limited — 2020

This was a costs judgment following the reserved merits judgment of 16 October 2020. The respondent applied for costs under Rules 76(1)(a) and 76(2) after the claimant's claims had been dismissed, relying on earlier findings that she had pursued extensive and exaggerated allegations, had expanded her case beyond the seven agreed Chosen Allegations, and had acted dishonestly in relation to covert recordings and transcripts.

The tribunal accepted that the claimant had repeatedly failed to comply with case management directions and disclosure orders, including by delaying production of audio recordings until the day before the five-day merits hearing. It also accepted that she had been deliberately evasive in cross-examination and that the respondent had incurred substantial additional time and cost dealing with the disclosure issues, the expanded case, and multiple case management hearings. The claimant asserted that she was impecunious, but she did not give evidence to substantiate that position.

Applying the two-stage approach in Monaghan v Close Thornton and the whole-picture approach in Barnsley BC v Yerrakalva, the tribunal found that the costs threshold was triggered and that it should exercise its discretion in the respondent's favour. It recorded that the respondent's solicitors' profit costs were £112,456.60 and counsel's fees were £44,150.00 net of VAT, giving a total claimed figure of £187,927.92 including VAT; because the respondent was VAT-registered, the net figure was £156,606.60. As that exceeded the £20,000 limit for a fixed costs order under Rule 78(1)(a), the tribunal ordered costs to be assessed in detail under Rule 78(1)(b).