Mr A Breeden v Full Fat Productions Ltd — 2026

This was a judgment on the claimant's application for a preparation time order and travel expenses against Full Fat Productions Ltd following the postponement of a hearing on 8 October 2025. The tribunal recorded that the underlying proceedings included complaints for whistleblowing detriment, unlawful deduction from wages and other payments, and that the claimant had applied to amend his claim to include automatic unfair dismissal and interim relief. Those substantive matters were not determined in this judgment.

The claimant sought £472.50, relying on what he said was unreasonable conduct by the respondent: Mr Adams or a representative did not attend the 8 October 2025 hearing, evidence was not provided about Mr Adams being in France, and arrangements had not been made for the respondent's post to be monitored while he was absent. The tribunal considered Rules 74, 77 and 82 of the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules 2024, and the authorities Yerrakelva v Barnsley MBC and McPherson v BNP Paribas on unreasonable conduct and costs discretion.

Employment Judge Bansal found that the Rule 74 threshold was not met. The judge was satisfied that Mr Adams' absence was not intentional or deliberate, that he was in France looking after his son with special needs, and that he did not know of the notice of hearing because correspondence at his office had not been opened. The judge found that the failure to arrange monitoring of correspondence did not constitute unreasonable conduct for the purpose of the application.

The tribunal also stated that, even if that conclusion was wrong, it would not have exercised its discretion to make an order because the claimant would have had to prepare for and travel to the hearing in any event, irrespective of the respondent's non-attendance. The application for a preparation time order and travel expenses was refused, and no costs or preparation time award was made.