C, a 17-year-old, had been dismissed from her apprentice position with R following absence after a miscarriage (the Employment tribunal had accepted that the dismissal was not related to her miscarriage).
C and her representative (a partner in a law firm) argued that the miscarriage was related to stress and claimed for personal injury on that basis against R. The claim was rejected as medical evidence did not support it.
R then made applications for costs against both C and her representative broadly because they should have dropped the PI claim as the medical evidence did not support it. The employment tribunal awarded costs against both and also made findings, among other things, that R had been negligent in not advising C to drop the PI claim.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal allowed both appeals. On C’s appeal, they found that the ET had not considered her ability to pay. On the representative's appeal, the finding of negligence could not stand without further investigation relating to any advice given. Therefore the applications were remitted to the same ET.
See Robinson & Ojo v Hall Gregory Recruitment Ltd UKEAT/0425/13/BA
Sarah Rushton (firstname.lastname@example.org)
This is intended for general information only and should not be considered as giving advice in relation to any individual case nor be taken as applying to any particular case. No liability is accepted for any such use of the information.