Claimant v J D Wetherspoon Plc
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the claimant's failure to disclose his criminal conviction and subsequent lie were not something which arose in consequence of his disability (Autism Spectrum Disorder). There was no medical evidence to support a causative link between his ASD and his dishonesty. The claimant had previously disclosed convictions in other job applications but chose not to in this case to improve his chances of employment. This was an active decision not caused by his disability.
Facts
The claimant, who has Autism Spectrum Disorder, brought a claim for discrimination arising from disability after being dismissed for failing to disclose an unspent criminal conviction on his job application and subsequently lying about it when challenged. A deposit order of £100 was made after a preliminary hearing found the claim had little reasonable prospect of success. The claimant continued with the claim, which was dismissed at a full merits hearing in April 2025. The respondent then applied for costs of approximately £12,757.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the respondent's costs application despite finding the claimant had acted unreasonably in continuing the claim after the deposit order. The tribunal exercised its discretion not to award costs, taking into account that the claimant was a vulnerable litigant in person with autism, had a strong subjective belief in his claim, and was of limited means. The £100 deposit was ordered to be paid to the respondent.
Practical note
Even where the threshold for unreasonable conduct is clearly met (including via a deposit order), tribunals retain broad discretion to refuse costs orders for vulnerable unrepresented litigants with limited means who genuinely believed in their claim, reflecting the principle that costs remain the exception in employment tribunals.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1402964/2022
- Decision date
- 25 April 2025
- Hearing type
- costs
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- hospitality
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No