header-logo header-logo

30 October 2014 / Clare Harrington , Daniel Hobbs
Issue: 7628 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

The hidden costs

harringtonhobbs

What is the true price of defending an employment tribunal claim? Clare Harrington & Daniel Hobbs report

Since the introduction of fees in the employment tribunal and the consequent reduction in claims, it might be thought that it is the employer who now comfortably has the upper hand in this jurisdiction. In the majority of claims, the claimant is now required to comply with the requirements of early conciliation and he must pay a fee to issue his claim or navigate the application process for remission. The necessity to pay fees (in circumstances where remission is unavailable) does not stop, of course, with the issue of the claim, with further payments required to progress to a final hearing. These elements of the process have surely strengthened the tactical position of many employers. To a great extent, an employer may sit back and see whether the claimant will indeed issue a claim and actually “put his money where his mouth is”.

Recoverability of costs

However, what this approach fails to acknowledge is the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll