Cases2221536/2024

Claimant v Bidvest Noonan (UK) Limited

13 June 2025Before Employment Judge NicolleLondon Centralon papers

Outcome

Other

Facts

The claimant applied to postpone a full merits hearing on 24 October 2024, only 6 days before the scheduled hearing dates of 30-31 October 2024. The claimant had booked flights to Thailand on 23 February 2024 but failed to inform the tribunal or obtain necessary permissions to give evidence from abroad. The respondent had already incurred counsel's brief fee of £3,500 plus VAT (£4,200 total) for the hearing.

Decision

The tribunal awarded costs of £4,200 against the claimant and his representative jointly and severally. The belated postponement application without the requisite 7 days notice, combined with the failure to obtain permissions to give evidence from abroad despite booking flights months earlier, constituted unreasonable conduct under Rule 76. Alternatively, the representative was liable for wasted costs under Rule 80 for failing to bring the matter to the tribunal's attention in advance.

Practical note

Parties and their representatives must give proper notice of postponement applications and cannot wait until days before a hearing to disclose pre-existing travel plans, or they risk substantial costs orders for wasted expenses.

Legal authorities cited

AQ Ltd v Holden [2012] IRLR 648Gee v Shell UK Ltd [2003] IRLR 82Yerrakalva v Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council [2012] ICR 420Oni v Unison ICR D17Lodwick v Southwark [2004] ICR 844

Statutes

Employment Tribunals (Constitution & Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, Rule 76Employment Tribunals (Constitution & Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, Rule 80Employment Tribunals (Constitution & Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, Rule 30A

Case details

Case number
2221536/2024
Decision date
13 June 2025
Hearing type
costs
Hearing days
1
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
professional services
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
lay rep