<?xml version="1.0"?>
<oembed><version>1.0</version><provider_name>Ma&#xEE;tre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p&#xE9;nal &#xE0; Paris</provider_name><provider_url>https://kohenavocats.com/ru/</provider_url><author_name>Ma&#xEE;tre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p&#xE9;nal &#xE0; Paris</author_name><author_url>https://kohenavocats.com/ru/</author_url><title>Kite et al v Madeline Clark</title><type>rich</type><width>600</width><height>338</height><html>&lt;blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="4xWnGGky1L"&gt;&lt;a href="https://kohenavocats.com/ru/jurisprudences/kite-et-al-v-madeline-clark/"&gt;Kite et al v Madeline Clark&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;iframe sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" src="https://kohenavocats.com/ru/jurisprudences/kite-et-al-v-madeline-clark/embed/#?secret=4xWnGGky1L" width="600" height="338" title="&#xAB;Kite et al v Madeline Clark&#xBB; &#x2014; Ma&#xEE;tre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p&#xE9;nal &#xE0; Paris" data-secret="4xWnGGky1L" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" class="wp-embedded-content"&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;&lt;script&gt;
/*! This file is auto-generated */
!function(d,l){"use strict";l.querySelector&amp;&amp;d.addEventListener&amp;&amp;"undefined"!=typeof URL&amp;&amp;(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&amp;&amp;!/[^a-zA-Z0-9]/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),c=new RegExp("^https?:$","i"),i=0;i&lt;o.length;i++)o[i].style.display="none";for(i=0;i&lt;a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&amp;&amp;(s.removeAttribute("style"),"height"===t.message?(1e3&lt;(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r&lt;200&amp;&amp;(r=200),s.height=r):"link"===t.message&amp;&amp;(r=new URL(s.getAttribute("src")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&amp;&amp;n.host===r.host&amp;&amp;l.activeElement===s&amp;&amp;(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener("message",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll("iframe.wp-embedded-content"),r=0;r&lt;s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute("data-secret"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+="#?secret="+t,e.setAttribute("data-secret",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:"ready",secret:t},"*")},!1)))}(window,document);
//# sourceURL=https://kohenavocats.com/wp-includes/js/wp-embed.min.js
&lt;/script&gt;
</html><description>SUMMARY PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE The employment tribunal did not err in law in refusing the respondents&#x2019; application for costs without holding a hearing or seeking further written submissions HIS HONOUR JUDGE JAMES TAYLER Introduction 1. This is an appeal against the judgment of Employment Judge Norris, sent to the parties on 10 June 2019, refusing the respondents&#x2019; application for costs....</description></oembed>
