Cases2207740/2020

Claimant v Evolve Housing + Support

17 February 2025Before Employment Judge P KlimovLondon Centralremote video

Outcome

Other

Facts

This is a costs judgment following a successful EAT appeal by the claimant against a strike-out order. The claimant's original claim had been struck out by EJ Klimov in June 2022 for scandalous, vexatious, and unreasonable conduct. The respondents applied for costs based on the same conduct. The EAT reinstated the claim on 1 February 2024, finding the strike-out was an error of law, but agreed the claimant's conduct had been unreasonable. This hearing determined the stayed costs application.

Decision

The tribunal awarded costs of £11,323 against the claimant, payable by 5 August 2024. Despite the EAT overturning the strike-out, the tribunal found the claimant's conduct was extremely serious, vexatious, and unreasonable, forcing the respondents to incur unnecessary legal costs. The claimant's vindictive campaign weaponised the proceedings and caused substantial delay. Although personally of modest means, the claimant's wife earns £92,000 per annum and the household could meet the award.

Practical note

Even where a strike-out is overturned on appeal, a costs order against a claimant for vexatious and unreasonable conduct can still be justified if the conduct forced the respondent to incur unnecessary legal costs, notwithstanding that the strike-out application itself ultimately failed.

Legal authorities cited

Yerrakalva v Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council [2012] ICR 420Scott v Russell 2013 EWCA Civ 1432Dyer v Secretary of State for Employment EAT 183/83McPherson v BNP Paribas (London Branch) 2004 ICR 1398Kotecha v Insurety plc UKEAT 0461/07Lodwick v Southwark London Borough Council [2004] ICR 884Jilley v Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS TrustDoyle v North West London Hospitals NHS Trust [2012] ICR D21Vaughan v LB Lewisham [2013] IRLR 713Shields Automotive Ltd v Greig EATS/0024/10Howman v Queen Elizabeth Hospital Kings Lynn EAT 0509/12Omooba v Michael Garrett Associates Ltd [2024] EAT 30Yeboah v Crofton 2002 IRLR 634Emuemukoro v Croma Vigilant (Scotland) Limited [2022] ICR 335Haydar v Pennine Acute NHS Trust UKEAT/0141/17

Statutes

ET Rules Rule 84ET Rules Rule 37(1)(b)ET Rules Rule 78(1)ET Rules Rule 76(1)(a)

Case details

Case number
2207740/2020
Decision date
17 February 2025
Hearing type
costs
Hearing days
1
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
charity
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
No