Cases2409890/2022

Claimant v Alternative Futures Group Limited

27 May 2025Before Employment Judge Victoria ButlerManchesterremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalwithdrawn

Claim withdrawn by claimant on 14 April 2023, within 14 days of the Case Management Hearing before EJ Batten on 30 March 2023.

Automatic Unfair Dismissalwithdrawn

Claim withdrawn by claimant on 14 April 2023 following the first Case Management Preliminary Hearing.

Wrongful Dismissalwithdrawn

Claim withdrawn by claimant on 14 April 2023 along with the unfair dismissal complaints.

Detrimentwithdrawn

Claim for being subject to a detriment for having made a protected disclosure was withdrawn by the claimant on 10 June 2024, less than one month before the scheduled final hearing.

Otherwithdrawn

Part-time worker discrimination claim was withdrawn on 10 June 2024. Claimant alleged he was the only part-time worker made redundant and was entitled to a written statement of reasons which was not provided, but withdrew before final hearing.

Facts

Claimant, a part-time registered manager with 6 years' service, brought claims for unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, whistleblowing detriment and part-time worker discrimination. Following a CMPH on 30 March 2023, he withdrew dismissal-related claims on 14 April 2023. Respondent sent costs warning on 15 January 2024 offering not to pursue costs if claims withdrawn immediately. Claimant did not respond until 12 May 2024 with a counter-offer. Claimant withdrew remaining claims on 10 June 2024, less than one month before final hearing. Respondent applied for costs of £7,312.

Decision

Employment Judge M Butler refused the respondent's costs application. The tribunal found that the claimant, represented by an inexperienced lay representative, had not conducted the proceedings unreasonably. The claimant had withdrawn weaker claims early, complied with case management directions, and reasonably (if mistakenly) interpreted the respondent's costs warning offer as remaining open until the date the tribunal needed to know if the case was ready for final hearing.

Practical note

Even a late withdrawal of claims does not automatically warrant a costs order, especially where a lay-represented claimant has complied with directions, withdrawn weaker claims early, and can show a reasonable (if mistaken) interpretation of settlement communications.

Legal authorities cited

Yerrakalva v Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council [2012] ICR 420McPherson v BNP Paribas [2004] ICR 1398Jilley v Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS TrustSingle Homeless Project v Abu UKEAT/0519/12Vaughan v London Borough of Lewisham [2013] IRLR 713Arrowsmith v Nottingham Trent UniversityShield Automotive Ltd v Greig UKEATS/0024/10Abaya v Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust UKEAT/0258/16

Statutes

Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure Regulations 2024 Rule 74Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure Regulations 2024 Rule 82Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure Regulations 2024 Rule 76

Case details

Case number
2409890/2022
Decision date
27 May 2025
Hearing type
costs
Hearing days
1
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
charity
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
Registered manager
Service
6 years

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
lay rep