Mr K Kabbani v Scottish Police Authority — 2025

This judgment concerned the respondent's application for expenses after the claimant sought to postpone the hearing listed for 14 February 2025. The respondent relied on rule 74(2)(c) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024 and said it had been put to unnecessary expense of £1,423.50 plus VAT because the postponement application was made less than seven days before the hearing. The claimant opposed the application, explaining that medical evidence was not yet available, that the tribunal and respondent had been alerted on 29 January 2025 to the likelihood of a postponement application, and that the formal application was made on 4 February 2025.

The Employment Judge refused the expenses application. The tribunal noted that expenses in employment tribunals are exceptional rather than the rule and that their purpose is compensatory, not punitive. It had information on the time spent by the respondent's representatives, but it was not clear whether that was the fee actually incurred. The tribunal was also not addressed on the claimant's ability to pay, and it was unclear whether he would be responsible for any expenses or supported by a trade union.

The judge accepted that the claimant was legally represented and that there was no suggestion that his solicitor had caused the delay. The judgment records that the solicitor had kept the tribunal and respondent informed, that there was no evidence the claimant had failed to keep her informed, and that the lack of knowledge about the claimant's hospitalisation in late January 2025 was understandable. The tribunal found that the application for postponement was not totally unexpected, that the respondent was entitled to oppose it, and that it was highly likely that the same opposition would have been made even if the application had been lodged earlier. The respondent's application for expenses was therefore refused. There was no monetary award.