In 1998 Dench v Flynn held that a temporary new job doesn’t necessarily break the chain of causation and cut off future losses from the date of securing the new job. This case at the EAT illustrates the importance of the word necessarily and that the Tribunal does still have discretion to hold that losses stop from securing the new job.

The case is also authority for the proposition that a costs hearing does not have to be heard before the same Tribunal that heard the hearing about which the costs application relates, although for practical reasons it will normally be preferable for any costs application to be dealt with by the same Tribunal that presided over the hearing about which the costs application is made.