The Employment Appeal Tribunal ("EAT") has issued a conditional costs order requiring Nomura International PLC ("Nomura") to reimburse former employee, Vladimir Portnykh the £1,600 EAT fee he paid to appeal his Employment Tribunal ("ET") claim.
Portnykh appealed against the ET's finding in his unfair dismissal claim. He paid the £1,600 EAT fee but was applying for fee remission. His appeal was successful; however, no decision had yet been made in respect of his application for fee remission.
Rule 34A(2A) of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules 1993 states that the EAT could make a costs order requiring the Respondent to pay the Appellant an amount no greater than the EAT fee paid.
In reaching its decision, the EAT was satisfied that Nomura had the means to pay and had substantially lost on the appeal.
Following the High Court's recent decision on UNISON's application for judicial review, the Ministry of Justice has updated its website stating that the general position is that a successful Appellant employee should expect to recover the fees he or she paid from the Respondent.
Vladimir Portnykh v Nomura International plc UKEAT/0448/13/LA
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.