Rad Kohanzad reports on the upward trend to award costs in employment tribunals
Nicholson Highlandwear v Nicholson UKEATS/0058/09 is the latest in a trilogy of judgments that appear to indicate a worrying trend towards the awarding of costs in employment tribunals.
The history of this series of Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decisions starts with the case of Daleside Nursing Home v Mathew UKEAT/0519/08; a case which sent a few ripples through the employment law community last year. In Daleside, at the heart of the claim was the contention that the respondent had called the claimant a black bitch. The tribunal found that that was not said, dismissed her discrimination claim, but refused an application for costs.
The EAT held that the fact that the central allegation was a lie necessarily involved a finding by the tribunal that it was a deliberate and cynical lie, which amounted to unreasonable behaviour. The EAT held that the failure to award costs was in the circumstances perverse.
The no costs rule
When judgment
