Horizon Security Services Ltd v Ndeze and another

JurisdictionUK Non-devolved
Neutral CitationUKEAT/71/14
Date2014
Year2014
CourtEmployment Appeal Tribunal
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
5 cases
  • R (Unison) v Lord Chancellor (Nos 1 and 2)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 26 August 2015
    ...in every case (e.g. where their success has been only partial) — see Portnykh v Nomura International plc [2013] UKEAT 448/13, Horizon Security Services Ltd v Ndeze [2014] UKEAT 71/14, [2014] IRLR 854, and Look Ahead Housing and Care Ltd v Chetty [2015] UKEAT 37/14, [2015] ICR 375. Those ......
  • R Unison (No. 2) v The Lord Chancellor Equality and Human Rights Commission (Intervener)
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 17 December 2014
    ...guidance on recovery of fees for successful claimants in Portnykh v Nomura International plc [2013] UKEAT 0448/13/LA and Horizon Security Services Ltd v Ndeze [2014] ICR D31; [2014] IRLR 854. Rule 34A(2A) gives a discretion to the EAT to reimburse fees by way of a costs order. In Portnykh ......
  • Ottimo Property Services Ltd v 1) Mr G Duncan 2) Warwick Estate Properties Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • Employment Appeal Tribunal
    • 9 January 2015
    ...as amended). He relied on the approach I had suggested might be followed in the case of Horizon Security Services Ltd v Ndeze and Anor [2014] IRLR 854. Since then, the EAT President has also given some guidance in relation to the operation of Rule 34A(2A) in the case of Look Ahead Housing a......
  • Mr J Sinnott and others v Urbanbubble Liverpool Ltd (in Creditors’ Voluntary Liquidation) and others: 2406175/2020 and others
    • United Kingdom
    • Employment Tribunal
    • 20 September 2022
    ...particular client. 54. When it comes to the condition in reg.3(3)(a)(ii), Her Honour Judge Eady QC in Horizon Security Service v Ndeze [2014] IRLR 854 said that the intention of the client could be expressed by the client or inferred by the Tribunal. In either event, the question is to be a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT