Costs against a fraudulent or lying Claimant

In Nicolson Highlandwear Ltd v Nicolson (Practice and Procedure : Costs) [2010] UKEAT the tribunal found that the Claimant’s dismissal, whilst automatically unfair, was by reason of his “prima facie fraudulent intromissions with the Respondent Company’s business”, and his compensation was reduced by 100%.

Costs were not awarded, due to a finding by the ET that the Claimant “did not act unreasonably” in bringing the claim. Lady Smith finds this conclusion perverse. This goes further than the recent line of cases – see my post last year on two authorities deprecating tribunals’ refusals to award costs against lying Claimants.

This case is rather fact sensitive, but will be grist to the mill for many Respondent representatives trying to recoup the cost of meritless or vexatious claims. Another important point comes from Lady Smith’s rejection of the notion that it is legitimate to bring a claim for unfair dismissal simply to obtain a finding that it was so – there is a declaratory power in discrimination legislation, but not in Part X of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Many many clients have told their lawyers in conference that “it’s not about the money, it’s the principle”, but this EAT judgment will strengthen that lawyer’s warning that courts and tribunals do not usually look at it that way.

Share this post:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • Technorati
  • Twitter
This entry was posted in Costs, Employment Tribunal. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Costs against a fraudulent or lying Claimant

  1. tony chowles says:

    I lost a case (google Chowles v. West) due to an employee making fraudulent claims and perverting the course of justice. This was demonstrated in court but the Judges preferred to ignore this and chose to cast me as the criminal. When I appealed the judge – Judge Christensenof Bristol Employment Tribunal- refused to release the court records to assist my appeal. When she was ordered by the appeal judge to provide the records, she sent a transcript written by herself which was completely inaccurate and distorted the record to my detriment. This is perversion of justice by a judge. You can read my blog at http://www.timeforjustice.co.uk

    • Usefully Employed says:

      Thanks for your comment Tony. I’ve read some of the entries on your site – it’s always worth all of us remembering what the human consequences can be of a large tribunal award.

  2. I have had a good look through that blog too. It does astound me how the system does seem to work out sometimes. I have bookmarked the blog by the way; many thanks for sharing the link here.

  3. Tobi Baker says:

    Hi,

    Great post,

    Tony, I took a look at the blog too. Thanks for the info.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>