The Claimant, a Broadcast Journalist, applied for a role with the Respondent. When he was unsuccessful, he brought a complaint of direct sex discrimination, alleging that there had been sex discrimination in favour of the female candidates for the post. The ET dismissed his claim and made a costs award against him. The Claimant appealed on the grounds that the ET had erred in law (1) in failing to consider whether he had been treated less favourably than his comparators, either the actual comparators in terms of the other candidates or a hypothetical comparator constructed using the cases of the other candidates, and (2) in making the award of costs.

The EAT held that the ET did not err in law in its consideration of comparators or its making of the costs award.