In dismissing the Claimant’s complaints of race discrimination, victimisation and harassment, the Tribunal exercised its discretion on costs and made an award for costs against the Claimant in the sum of £8,900. The Tribunal accepted the Respondent’s submission that the Claimant’s evidence was not worthy of belief and they should not trust anything the Claimant said unless it was corroborated by cogent evidence. The Tribunal also formed the view that the Claimant has falsified certain documents. The Tribunal considered that “without more” to conduct a case by not telling the truth is to conduct a case unreasonably. It was “as simple as that” in the eyes of the Tribunal. However, the Employment Appeal Tribunal had a different view.
The EAT said the Tribunal should have considered all the circumstances of the case, including the procedural history and the extent to which the Claimant’s lies had made a material impact on its actual findings and by failing to do so, the Tribunal had misdirected itself. The Respondent’s submissions and the Tribunal’s findings in relation to the Claimant’s evidence were powerful factors that the Tribunal could properly take into account as part of the exercise of its discretion but they were not the be all and end all.
The EAT remitted the case back to the same Tribunal to reconsider its costs award.
