Barrister Ordered to Pay Nearly £7000 in Costs for Remote Hearing Conducted from Train

A barrister has been ordered to pay close to £7,000 in wasted costs after attempting to participate in the first day of an employment tribunal hearing while travelling on trains in Germany.

Michael Engelhardt Sprack received permission to appear remotely at the final hearing due to childcare commitments and his residence in Germany while practising in the UK. However, when the hearing commenced, he initially failed to appear on screen and joined approximately 20 minutes later, wearing headphones and while on a train.

Employment Judge Wedderspoon noted that background noise from other passengers was audible and determined that the tribunal could not proceed under such conditions. The hearing was paused to allow Engelhardt Sprack time to find a quieter location.

Instead of waiting at the station, he boarded a second train and attempted to join the proceedings once more. The judge remarked that the internet connection was inadequate and the background noise made it difficult to hear the barrister, labelling the situation as “totally inappropriate” for conducting the hearing.

The hearing was ultimately adjourned until the following day, at which point Engelhardt Sprack appeared in person at Birmingham Employment Tribunal. In his written submissions, he explained that he had planned to break his journey from Munich to Birmingham and secure a private room along the way; however, childcare issues delayed his departure until the morning of the hearing.

While he did offer an apology, the tribunal observed that there was “no explanation” as to why he did not inform the tribunal or the respondent beforehand. In a reconsideration judgment, Judge Wedderspoon concluded that conducting a remote hearing while travelling by train was “totally inappropriate and unprofessional” and did not comply with guidance on remote hearings.

Although the tribunal did not categorise his actions as improper or unreasonable, it deemed his conduct to be “negligence” due to his failure to meet the expected professional standards. The judge also highlighted the negligence in not notifying the tribunal or the respondent’s legal teams about his travel complications.

The tribunal indicated that advance notice could have prevented unnecessary attendance and costs incurred by the respondents. Consequently, it found that the lost hearing day resulted in unnecessary legal and travel expenses for the respondents.

Engelhardt Sprack was ordered to pay the first respondent, Gitpod GmbH, £6,767.44 in wasted costs, which included counsel’s fees, solicitor costs, travel, hotel expenses, and the attendance of a trainee solicitor. The tribunal chose not to award an additional three hours of solicitor time as it was unclear if this extra work was directly related to the aborted hearing.