We use cookies to offer you a better experience and analyse site traffic.

By continuing to use this website, you consent to the use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.

Discrimination

GET IN TOUCH

Employment

Our Discrimination Team

Members of the Employment Group, at all levels of seniority, regularly represent both claimants and respondents in employment discrimination claims.

We recognise that in Employment Tribunal work, where costs are rarely recoverable, it is important to be able to offer experienced counsel at a level that is proportionate to the value of the claim.

As such, many of our junior members have significant Employment Tribunal advocacy experience, both in fighting discrimination trials and dealing with preliminary issues (such as whether a claimant is or is not disabled within the statutory definition). 

Our senior members are regularly appearing in longer or more complex discrimination Employment Tribunal trials and appeals to the EAT and the Court of Appeal.

We have considerable experience (on both sides of such litigation) in cases involving employment discrimination on the grounds of:

  • Race
  • Sex
  • Sexual orientation
  • Religion and belief
  • Disability
  • Age

We provide expertise and commercial experience at all stages of such litigation, from preliminary pre-issue advice through to mediation (including Employment Tribunal judicial mediation, which we find is increasingly appropriate in substantial discrimination claims now) and to representation at trial and on appeal.

Here are some examples of our work:-

  • Durrant v Chief Constable for Avon & Somerset  - Tim Adkin for the appellant, successfully appealed to the Court of Appeal against the decision of the High Court arising from the failure of the trial judge to consider the operation of the two-stage burden of proof in a claim of race discrimination against a police force.

  • Jones v Tesco Ltd  – Orlando Holloway represented Tesco in their successful defence of claims of Direct Sex Discrimination and Constructive Unfair Dismissal. The Claimant worked as a female lorry driver in a predominantly male environment and complained of a long history of less favourable treatment and harassment culminating in being given a disciplinary sanction for leaving her lorry by the side of the road at the end of her shift. At the end of a 5 day trial all claims were dismissed.

  • Emerton -v- Marcos Bar Ltd  – Iris Ferber for the respondent. A Disability discrimination claim listed for 3 days, with preliminary question of whether Claimant was disabled. Iris Succeeded in getting the claim dismissed on day 1, on the basis that Claimant had failed to prove he was disabled.

  • Wieclawski v. London Underground Limited – Rebecca Thomas for the respondent. A Disability discrimination and unfair dismissal claim. Train driver dismissed following safety breach whilst suffering from an acute bereavement reaction. Won at first instance and successfully defended appeal in EAT.  Appeal raised issues of knowledge of disability, reasonable adjustments and adequacy of Judge’s reasons.

  • Tiffin v Chief Constable of Surrey Benjamin Uduje was instructed on behalf of the Chief Constable in a 2 weeks multiple discrimination and highly contested claims, which attracted considerable national media attention.

  • EP v The Gym Limited - Stefan Liberadzki represented an Employment Tribunal claimant who successfully established “employee” status, despite the fact that the contract described him as “self-employed” and he received no pay under the arrangement. More information can be found here

News & events

Double-edged sword: Can you have two possession orders at once?

Double-edged sword: Can you have two possession orders at once? In a recent case an interesting point arose around whether or not it was possible for a landlord under an AST to have two possession orders in respect of the same property at the same time. Facts The facts of the case were fairly typical.

13th March 2017 Read more

Housing Bulletin No 18 – Forfeiture for non-payment of service charges

Welcome to this, the 18th bulletin from the Housing Team. We hope that you will find the content of interest: if you wish to receive further updates you can subscribe by replying to housing@42br.com Forfeiture for non-payment of service charges Last month, we ran a workshop in Chambers exploring the law and procedure of forfeiting a

9th January 2017 Read more

Housing Bulletin No 17 – Anti-social behaviour injunctions

Welcome to this, the 17th bulletin from the Housing Team. We hope that you will find the content of interest: if you wish to receive further updates you can subscribe by replying to housing@42br.com Anti-social behaviour injunctions: can the Court rely on historic bad behaviour? Birmingham City Council v Glenn Parode [2016] EWHC 3119 (QB) In

14th December 2016 Read more

Housing Bulletin No 16 – Warrants for Possession

Welcome to this, the sixteenth bulletin from the Housing Team. We hope that you will find the content of interest: if you wish to receive further updates you can subscribe by replying to housing@42br.com Warrants for Possession Cardiff City Council v Lee (Flowers) [2016] EWCA Civ 1034 The Senior Master has today issued her practice note

22nd November 2016 Read more

Housing Bulletin No 13 – Human Rights and the Private Sector

Welcome to this, the thirteenth bulletin from the Housing Team. We hope that you will find the content of interest: if you wish to receive further updates you can subscribe by replying to housing@42br.com This bulletin discusses the judgment in the case of McDonald (by her litigation friend Duncan J McDonald) v McDonald & others [2016] UKSC 28.

20th June 2016 Read more

Housing Law Bulletin No 12 – updating service of 2015 on all issues relating to housing law

Welcome to this, our twelfth updating service of 2015 on all issues relating to housing law — whether social or private, landlord or tenant. Here, Niamh O’Brien offers a case law update : Mansing Moorjani v Durban Estates Limited [2015] EWCA Civ 1252 An unusual set of facts permits the Court of Appeal to review the legal basis for damages to be awarded for disrepair to premises let on a long lease.

22nd December 2015 Read more

Housing Law Bulletin No 10 – Retaliatory Evictions Scheduled changes to the section 21 possession procedure

In this issue of 42 Bedford Row’s Housing Bulletin Peter Jolley discuses covers changes to the ’section 21 possession procedure' being introduced on 1 October 2015 by the Deregulation Act 2015, specifically restrictions upon certain landlords in using the section 21 procedure if a complaint has been received by their tenant about the condition of the property.

24th August 2015 Read more

Housing Law Bulletin No 5

Topic: “How should the courts assess whether a homeless applicant is vulnerable and in priority need of housing, with reference to the Housing Act 1996 s.189 (1)(c)?”

2nd July 2015 Read more

Housing Law Bulletin No 4

Topic: Changes to the tenancy deposit protection rules. On 26 March 2015, sections 30 to 32 of the Deregulation Act 2015 came in to force. What are the implications of this for landlords in relation to tenancy deposit schemes?

2nd July 2015 Read more

Housing Law Bulletin No 2

Welcome to this, the second bulletin from the Housing Team. We hope that you will find the content of interest: if you wish to receive further updates you can subscribe by replying to housing@42br.com. Topic: Akerman- Livingstone v Aster Communities Ltd “Can the court summarily dispose of a defence to possession based on an allegation of unlawful

31st March 2015 Read more

Housing Law Bulletin No 1

Welcome to this, the first bulletin of what will be a regular updating service on all issues relating to housing law — whether social or private, landlord or tenant. We hope that you will find the content of interest: if you wish to receive further updates you can subscribe by replying to housing@42br.com “Can a

4th March 2015 Read more

Dispensing with the need to consult about service charges – at what cost?

The Supreme Court has changed the law about dispensing with the need for consultation for qualifying works or qualifying long term agreements where tenants of residential dwellings have to pay service charges: Daejan v Benson [2013] UKSC 14. The requirements for consultation in the 2003 Regulations (2003 SI 1987) are complex and lengthy. They vary according to

8th March 2013 Read more