NHS employee loses unfair dismissal and discrimination claims but avoids costs order
An NHS employee's unfair dismissal and discrimination claims were dismissed, but the tribunal refused the Trust's application for costs, finding she had a genuine belief in her case and did not act unreasonably.
1 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was an employee of the respondent NHS Trust.
- The claimant brought claims for unfair dismissal and discrimination.
- All claims were dismissed after a hearing from 13 to 17 November 2023.
- The respondent applied for costs, arguing the claimant acted unreasonably.
- The tribunal found the claimant had a genuine belief in her case and did not act unreasonably.
- The costs application was dismissed.
Timeline
-
Claimant's initial settlement offer
The claimant offered to settle for £25,000.
-
Respondent's counteroffer and costs warning
The respondent offered £2,500 and warned that costs would be sought if the claim was unsuccessful.
-
ACAS contact
ACAS contacted the respondent indicating the claimant would consider an increased offer.
-
Respondent's increased offer
The respondent offered £3,000.
-
Hearing begins
The substantive hearing commenced via CVP.
-
Judgment
The tribunal dismissed all claims and gave oral reasons.
-
Costs application decided
The tribunal dismissed the respondent's costs application.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employee was unfairly dismissed and whether she suffered discrimination, and later whether she should pay the Trust's legal costs.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims for unfair dismissal and discrimination after a five-day hearing. The Trust then applied for costs of over £41,000, arguing the employee acted unreasonably. However, the tribunal found that while the employee had a combative style and redacted some WhatsApp messages, she had a genuine belief in her case and was not unreasonable. The costs application was dismissed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Litigants in person who have a genuine belief in their case may avoid costs orders even if they lose, as long as they do not act unreasonably.
- A costs warning from the other side does not automatically mean you will have to pay their costs if you lose.
- Tribunals consider whether a claim had reasonable prospects of success, not just whether it succeeded, when deciding on costs.
- Settlement offers made in a genuine attempt to resolve the case can show reasonableness, even if rejected.
A case that went both ways
This case shows that even when an employee loses their tribunal claims, they may not be left with a hefty legal bill. The NHS employee brought claims for unfair dismissal and discrimination against Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust. After a five-day hearing, all claims were dismissed. But the Trust then applied for costs, arguing the employee had acted unreasonably by pursuing weak claims and rejecting settlement offers.
Why the costs application failed
The tribunal examined the employee's conduct carefully. She was a litigant in person who genuinely believed she had been wronged. She had made a settlement offer of £25,000 early on, and later engaged with ACAS to negotiate. While she had a combative style and initially redacted some WhatsApp messages that were later found relevant, the tribunal did not consider this unreasonable. The key point was that her case was not wholly without merit, and she had not acted vexatiously or abusively.
What this means for similar claims
This decision highlights that tribunals are reluctant to penalise individuals who bring claims in good faith, even if they lose. The Trust's costs warning in June 2023 did not automatically mean the employee would have to pay. Instead, the tribunal focused on whether she had acted unreasonably in bringing or conducting the proceedings. For employees considering a claim, this case is a reminder that a genuine belief in your case can protect you from costs, but you should still be careful not to behave unreasonably during the process.
Similar cases
Disability discrimination claim based on mother's disability struck out
A tribunal struck out a former employee's claim that she was discriminated against because of her caring responsibilities for her disabled mother, ruling that section 15 of the Equality Act does not cover discrimination by association.
Claim withdrawn mid-hearing: costs refused despite unreasonable conduct
An online teacher who withdrew her disability discrimination claim on the second day of the hearing avoided a costs order, even though the tribunal found her conduct unreasonable.
Teacher's unfair dismissal and discrimination claims thrown out as too late
A teacher who brought claims for unfair dismissal, disability and race discrimination, and failure to deal with a flexible working request had all her claims dismissed because they were presented to the tribunal too late.
Former employee's unfair dismissal and disability claims dismissed as out of time
A former employee's unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims have been dismissed by an employment tribunal because they were presented too late, with no medical evidence to justify the delay.