Fabricated whistleblowing claim leads to £17,650 costs award
A former employee who fabricated protected disclosures and pursued false allegations against his employer has had his unfair dismissal claim thrown out and been ordered to pay £17,650 in costs.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #public-interest-disclosure
- #unfair-dismissal
- #fabricated-allegations
- #costs-awarded
- #litigant-in-person
Key facts
- The claimant brought claims of automatically unfair dismissal and detriment for making protected disclosures.
- The tribunal found that the claimant fabricated the alleged disclosures and none of the emails relied upon were sent.
- The claimant continued to pursue false allegations despite warnings about costs.
- The respondent was awarded costs of £17,650 due to the claimant's unreasonable conduct.
- The claimant's application for reconsideration was refused.
Timeline
-
Claimant indicates intention to bring proceedings
The claimant indicated he intended to bring legal proceedings against the respondent.
-
Claim presented
The claimant presented claims of automatically unfair dismissal and unlawful detriment on grounds of making a protected disclosure.
-
Substantive hearing begins
A six-day hearing commenced before Employment Judge Flood, Mrs Forrest, and Mr Howard.
-
Oral judgment dismissing claims
The tribunal gave oral judgment dismissing all complaints against the respondent.
-
Judgment sent to parties
The written judgment was sent to the parties.
-
Costs hearing
The tribunal heard the respondent's application for costs and ordered the claimant to pay £17,650.
-
Costs judgment sent
The judgment on costs was sent to the parties.
-
Written reasons for costs sent
Written reasons for the costs decision were sent to the parties.
-
Claimant applies for reconsideration
The claimant applied for reconsideration of the costs judgment.
-
Reconsideration refused
Employment Judge Flood refused the application for reconsideration.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the former employee was unfairly dismissed and subjected to detriment for making protected disclosures, and whether he acted unreasonably in bringing or conducting the proceedings so as to justify a costs order.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all complaints against Claim Time Limited t/a Claim Time Solicitors. It found that the claimant had fabricated the alleged protected disclosures and that none of the emails he relied upon were ever sent. The claimant continued to pursue false allegations despite warnings about costs.
Compensation:
- No compensation awarded as the claims were dismissed.
- The respondent was awarded costs of £17,650 due to the claimant's unreasonable conduct.
Lessons & takeaways
- Fabricating evidence or making false allegations in tribunal proceedings can lead to a costs order against you, even if you are a litigant in person.
- If you are warned about the risk of costs and continue to pursue a claim that is found to be without merit, you may be ordered to pay the other side's legal costs.
- A protected disclosure claim must be based on genuine disclosures made in the public interest – fabricating emails or other evidence will likely result in the claim being dismissed.
- Tribunals take a serious view of claimants who pursue false allegations, and costs can be substantial – in this case over £17,000.
This case shows the risks of bringing a tribunal claim based on fabricated evidence. The former employee alleged he had made protected disclosures about his employer's conduct, but the tribunal found that the emails he relied upon were never sent and the disclosures were entirely made up. Despite being warned about the potential for a costs order, he continued to pursue the claim.
What the employer did right
Claim Time Limited defended the claim robustly, instructing counsel and presenting evidence that exposed the fabrication. The tribunal noted that the claimant had persisted with false allegations, which justified the costs award. Employers faced with similar baseless claims should ensure they gather clear evidence and do not hesitate to apply for costs if the other party acts unreasonably.
Why the result matters
The case is a reminder that the employment tribunal has the power to award costs against a party who conducts proceedings unreasonably. For employees considering a whistleblowing claim, it is essential to have genuine evidence of a protected disclosure. Fabricating evidence not only guarantees the claim will fail but can also result in a significant financial penalty.
Similar cases
Former employee's claim dismissed as out of time nearly six years after leaving
A former employee's unfair dismissal, sex discrimination and whistleblowing claims were thrown out after he presented them almost six years after his employment ended. The tribunal also ordered him to pay £400 in costs.
Governance Manager's discrimination and unfair dismissal claims rejected
A Governance Manager who brought multiple claims of discrimination, victimisation and unfair dismissal after being made redundant has lost her case. The tribunal ordered her to pay £20,000 in costs.
Whistleblowing claim: repeated amendment applications not unreasonable enough for costs
A former chartered accountant who made multiple applications to amend her whistleblowing and sex discrimination claims avoided a costs order, even though most amendments were refused. The tribunal said her conduct was not unreasonable or vexatious.
Redundancy claim struck out for non-disclosure: costs of £6,853 awarded
A senior manager's unfair dismissal claim was struck out after he failed to disclose documents about his new job. The tribunal ordered him to pay £6,853 in costs for unreasonable conduct.