There is no doubt that employers can frequently be seen as easy marks for claimants and their legal representatives.
Most recent evidence of this was the story behind the claim against Supermac’s (read here). The most important aspect of this claim and the successful defence of it was the offer by Supermac’s in advance of legal proceedings and after those proceedings were initiated for the plaintiff and her legal advisers to come to the office and view the footage which clearly showed the claimant to be fully distracted by reading her mobile phone whilst walking around the store.
As the Judge awarded costs against the Plaintiff having lost her case how much responsibility for those costs should be applied to her solicitors who counselled her not to go to the offices to view the tapes alleging that this would be an oppressive environment?
