Howman v The Queen Elizabeth Hospital Kings Lynn (Practice and Procedure : Costs) [2013] UKEAT 0509_12_3004 (30 April 2013)

Howman v The Queen Elizabeth Hospital Kings Lynn (Practice and Procedure : Costs) [2013] UKEAT 0509_12_3004 (30 April 2013)

The tribunal erred by failing to consider the practical effect of its costs order on the claimant, specifically the likely need to sell his home and the possibility of capping the costs, despite having discretion to take ability to pay into account. This omission fatally undermined the costs order.

Citation
[2013] UKEAT 0509_12_3004
Parties
Appellant/claimant: Mr Gary Howman; Respondent/employer: Queen Elizabeth Hospital Kings Lynn NHS Foundation Trust
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
30 April 2013
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal Tribunal (eat) Costs Appeal / Appeal Against Costs Order Following Dismissal of Unfair Dismissal Claim
Outcome
Appeal allowed; costs order remitted to tribunal for reconsideration of terms in light of claimant's ability to pay.
Legal Topics
Costs in Employment Tribunal, Indemnity Costs, Ability to Pay, Unfair Dismissal, Detailed Assessment of Costs
Employment Law Civil Procedure Costs in Employment Tribunal Indemnity Costs Ability to Pay Unfair Dismissal Detailed Assessment of Costs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Gary Howman

Appellant/claimant

Queen Elizabeth Hospital Kings Lynn NHS Foundation Trust

Respondent/employer

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal Tribunal (eat) Costs Appeal / Appeal Against Costs Order Following Dismissal of Unfair Dismissal Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the employment tribunal erred in ordering costs to be assessed on the indemnity basis
  2. 2 Whether the tribunal failed to consider the claimant's ability to pay and the impact of the costs order

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal erred by failing to consider the practical effect of its costs order on the claimant, specifically the likely need to sell his home and the possibility of capping the costs, despite having discretion to take ability to pay into account. This omission fatally undermined the costs order.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; costs order remitted to tribunal for reconsideration of terms in light of claimant's ability to pay.

Orders

  • Remit to the original tribunal to reconsider the terms of the costs order, including whether to cap or otherwise limit the amount payable by the claimant.