Mihailescu v Better Lives (UK) Ltd (t/a Bluebird Care) [2019] UKEAT 0184_19_1411 (14 November 2019)

Mihailescu v Better Lives (UK) Ltd (t/a Bluebird Care) [2019] UKEAT 0184_19_1411 (14 November 2019)

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by concluding that the threshold for awarding costs was met; the majority of claims were not shown to have no reasonable prospect of success, the claimant did not act unreasonably in bringing or conducting proceedings, and the Tribunal failed to consider all relevant circumstances, including the Respondent's unreasonable resistance to employee status and the absence of deposit orders. Therefore, the costs jurisdiction was not engaged and the award must be set aside.

Citation
[2019] UKEAT 0184_19_1411
Parties
Appellant/claimant: V Milhailescu; Respondent: Respondent (unnamed)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
14 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal Tribunal Appeal / Appeal Against Employment Tribunal Costs Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed; costs order set aside
Legal Topics
Costs in Employment Tribunal, Employee Status, Unreasonable Conduct in Litigation, Discretion to Award Costs
Employment Law Civil Procedure Costs in Employment Tribunal Employee Status Unreasonable Conduct in Litigation Discretion to Award 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

V Milhailescu

Appellant/claimant

Respondent (unnamed)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal Tribunal Appeal / Appeal Against Employment Tribunal Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in concluding the threshold for awarding costs was met
  2. 2 Whether the claimant acted unreasonably in bringing or conducting proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the majority of claims had no reasonable prospect of success

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by concluding that the threshold for awarding costs was met; the majority of claims were not shown to have no reasonable prospect of success, the claimant did not act unreasonably in bringing or conducting proceedings, and the Tribunal failed to consider all relevant circumstances, including the Respondent's unreasonable resistance to employee status and the absence of deposit orders. Therefore, the costs jurisdiction was not engaged and the award must be set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; costs order set aside

Orders

  • The Employment Tribunal's costs award of £5,000 against the Claimant is set aside.
  • No discretion to award costs was engaged.