Carer ordered to pay £6,000 costs for bringing identical claim after first was dismissed
A carer who brought a second, materially identical unfair dismissal claim after her first was struck out and she was ordered to pay £20,000 costs has been ordered to pay a further £6,000 for vexatious conduct.
1 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
- #vexatious-conduct
- #abuse-of-process
- #second-claim
- #costs-order
- #unreasonable-behaviour
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a carer for four years and claimed unfair dismissal.
- Her first claim was dismissed for failing to comply with an unless order, and she was ordered to pay £20,000 costs.
- She presented a materially identical second claim on 27 December 2021.
- The second claim was withdrawn at a preliminary hearing on 10 October 2022 after advice that it had no prospects.
- The respondent applied for costs, arguing the second claim was vexatious and an abuse of process.
- The tribunal found the claimant's conduct vexatious, abusive, and unreasonable, and ordered her to pay £6,000.
Timeline
-
First claim presented
The claimant presented her first claim (3313830/2020) for unfair dismissal and unpaid sums.
-
First claim dismissed
Employment Judge O'Rourke dismissed the first claim for failure to comply with an unless order.
-
Amended judgment sent
The amended judgment and reasons for dismissal were sent to the parties.
-
Costs order for first claim
The claimant was ordered to pay £20,000 costs for the first claim.
-
Costs judgment sent
The costs judgment and reasons were sent to the parties.
-
Second claim presented
The claimant presented a materially identical second claim (3323856/2021).
-
Second claim withdrawn
At a preliminary hearing, the second claim was withdrawn upon advice that it had no prospects.
-
Costs application for second claim
The respondent applied for costs in defending the second claim.
-
Costs hearing
Employment Judge Dick heard the costs application and evidence on the claimant's means.
-
Costs judgment
The tribunal ordered the claimant to pay £6,000 costs for the second claim.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's conduct in presenting and pursuing a second claim that was materially the same as her first (which had been dismissed and costed) was vexatious, abusive, or unreasonable, and whether a costs order should be made.
The outcome
The tribunal ordered the claimant to pay £6,000 in costs to the respondent.
- The first claim was dismissed for failing to comply with an unless order, and the claimant was ordered to pay £20,000 costs.
- Despite this, she presented a second, materially identical claim on 27 December 2021.
- The second claim was withdrawn at a preliminary hearing after advice that it had no prospects.
- The tribunal found her conduct vexatious, abusive, and unreasonable, and ordered costs of £6,000.
Lessons & takeaways
- Bringing a second claim that is materially identical to one already dismissed can be seen as vexatious and lead to additional costs orders.
- A costs order from a first claim does not prevent a second claim being struck out, but it can increase the risk of further costs.
- Seeking advice from a McKenzie Friend or paralegal does not excuse pursuing a claim with no reasonable prospects.
- Tribunals will consider a claimant's ability to pay when setting the amount of a costs order.
What this case shows in practice
This case illustrates the risks of pursuing a claim that has already been dismissed. The claimant, a carer with four years' service, first claimed unfair dismissal but failed to comply with an unless order. Her first claim was struck out and she was ordered to pay £20,000 costs. Despite this, she presented a second, materially identical claim just weeks later. The tribunal found that this was vexatious and an abuse of process.
What the losing side could have done differently
The claimant could have avoided further costs by not re-presenting the same claim. Even if she believed the first dismissal was wrong, the proper route was to seek a reconsideration or appeal, not to start again. Her decision to pursue a second claim after being told it had no prospects led to the additional £6,000 costs order.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This decision reinforces that tribunals have strong powers to penalise repeat or abusive litigation. Claimants should not assume that a second claim will be treated as a fresh start. The tribunal will look at the history and may order costs if the conduct is unreasonable. For employers, it shows that costs applications can succeed where a claimant persists with a claim that has already been disposed of.
Similar cases
Costs of £4,490 for bringing a claim with no reasonable prospect of success
A former employee who brought claims of unfair dismissal, disability discrimination and holiday pay arrears has been ordered to pay £4,490 in costs after failing to attend hearings and ignoring a Calderbank offer.
Costs application against former employee dismissed: tribunal finds no unreasonable conduct
A tribunal has dismissed a company's application for a costs order and a wasted costs order against a former employee and her solicitor, finding that the claim was adequately particularised and that neither party acted unreasonably.
Former employee's repeated claims struck out as abuse of process
An employment tribunal struck out a series of claims brought by a former construction labourer against multiple respondents, finding them to be res judicata, an abuse of process, and totally without merit. The claimant was ordered to pay £20,000 in costs and £1,786 in preparation time.
Former employee's detriment claim struck out as abuse of process
A former employee's claim for protected disclosure detriment was struck out after the tribunal found the alleged acts were covered by judicial proceedings immunity and the claim was an abuse of process. A costs order of £20,000 was made.