Profile Analysis Ltd v. Cassidy [2003] UKEAT 0182_03_1508 (15 August 2003)

Profile Analysis Ltd v. Cassidy [2003] UKEAT 0182_03_1508 (15 August 2003)

The appeal, while likely to have failed, was not so clearly without merit as to be unnecessary, improper, or unreasonable; therefore, the threshold for awarding costs under Rule 34(1) was not met.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2003] UKEAT 0182_03_1508
Parties
Appellant: Profile Analysis Ltd; Respondent: Mr Cassidy
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
15 August 2003
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Application for Costs After Withdrawal of Appeal
Outcome
Application for costs rejected
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Constructive Dismissal, Costs Applications, Appeal Procedure
Employment Law Unfair Dismissal Constructive Dismissal Costs Applications Appeal Procedure

Source-derived case record

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Profile Analysis Ltd

Appellant

Mr Cassidy

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Application for Costs After Withdrawal of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's conduct in bringing or withdrawing the appeal justified an award of costs under Rule 34(1) of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules of Procedure 1993

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal, while likely to have failed, was not so clearly without merit as to be unnecessary, improper, or unreasonable; therefore, the threshold for awarding costs under Rule 34(1) was not met.

Court Disposition

Application for costs rejected