Cases3312451/2023

Claimant v OCS Group UK Limited

1 May 2025Before Employment Judge AlliottWatfordremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Direct Discrimination(race)failed

The claimant alleged that colleagues of Indian heritage conspired to fabricate allegations against her resulting in her dismissal. The tribunal found that while the claimant had a right to test the evidence, she failed to establish her case. The tribunal concluded that the claimant's long-standing antipathy towards Asian-Indian people adversely affected her interactions and her claim was not substantiated.

Facts

The claimant, Miss Abdullah, brought race discrimination claims alleging that colleagues of Indian heritage conspired to fabricate allegations against her resulting in her dismissal. This was a costs hearing following the dismissal of her substantive claims. The respondent sought costs of £4,903 plus VAT on grounds that the claim had no reasonable prospects and the claimant acted unreasonably/abusively. The claimant made repeated racist comments about Indian/Asian workers throughout her witness statement, particulars, and even during the costs hearing itself.

Decision

The tribunal rejected the 'no reasonable prospects' ground as discrimination claims are fact-specific and the claimant was entitled to test her evidence. However, the tribunal found that the claimant acted unreasonably and abusively by making highly offensive racist comments about Indian/Asian people throughout the proceedings, which significantly informed her decision to bring the claim. Despite the claimant's impecuniosity (living on disability benefits with £14,000 debt and facing eviction), the tribunal awarded costs of £1,000.

Practical note

Even where a claimant is impecunious and self-represented, costs may be awarded where racist comments made during proceedings demonstrate unreasonable and abusive conduct, particularly where those views were central to bringing the claim.

Legal authorities cited

Dyer v Secretary of State for Employment EAT 183/83McPherson v BMP [2004] ICR 1398Power v Panasonic UK Ltd [2003] IRLR 151

Statutes

Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024 Rule 74

Case details

Case number
3312451/2023
Decision date
1 May 2025
Hearing type
costs
Hearing days
1
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
professional services
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
No