Notable Cases:

• Phipps v. Priory Education Services [2022] EAT 129
• Phipps v. Priory Education Services [2023] ICR 1043 (Court of Appeal)
• Nicol v World Travel and Tourism Council and others [2024] ICR 893
• MacFarlane v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2024] ICR 22

Examples of recent work include: 

2024

Phipps Acting for the successful employer in the EAT (having not been instructed in the Tribunal below) in resisting an appeal by an employee against a decision not to reconsider the striking out of her age discrimination claim. The case required consideration of a novel point of law regarding the extent to which a finding of a failure by a party’s legal representative entitles that party to escape the consequences of that failure and have their case re-instated.

The EAT appeal was successfully defended but was then appealed further to the Court of Appeal.

Nicol Successfully defending the respondent (a lobbying organisation in the travel sector) in a seven figure claim for whistleblowing detriment and constructive dismissal brought by a former senior employee. After a multi day hearing, all claims were dismissed against Piers’ client. Thereafter the Claimant unsuccessfully appealed to the EAT.

National Security Cases: Piers is security vetted to accept cases involving the Police’s Royalty and Specialist Protection and Parliamentary and Diplomatic Protection commands and has undertaken a number of such cases (primarily involving age and race discrimination and whistleblowing allegations made by protection officers) both led by KC and as sole counsel.

Jugdeep Mahal v. Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (“CoPoM”)

Piers was asked to cover this three week hearing at short notice after original instructed Counsel was unwell, having had no previous involvement in the matter. It involved three consolidated claims containing multiple allegations of race discrimination and all species of disability discrimination. Following a lengthy delay in the promulgation of the judgment and reasons, all but a single instance of victimisation was dismissed by the Tribunal.

2025

 Novlett Williams v. CoPoM

Piers acted initially as sole counsel for the Commissioner in a long running complex and very high profile case of victimisation, race and sex discrimination brought by a black Chief Inspector in the Metropolitan Police. Chief Inspector Williams was convicted of possession of an indecent image of a child at the Old Bailey and subsequently dismissed but then reinstated.

The value of the claim was in excess of £300,000. The criminal proceedings attracted national TV and press coverage and the Tribunal was also extensively reported in the press 

The matter was listed for a three-week hearing in July 2025, at which point leading counsel had also been instructed. The Claimant withdrew all her claims on Day 5 on a drop hands basis.

Azam v. CoPoM

Acting for CoPoM in complex claim involving multiple allegations of direct race discrimination, victimisation and harassment. Listed for three week hearing in April / May 2025 following which the Tribunal dismissed all allegations.

 Bolton v. CoPoM

Acting for CoPoM in complex claim valued at £200,000 plus involving allegations of whistleblowing detriment, victimisation, disability discrimination, sex discrimination, harassment and discriminatory constructive dismissal. Listed for two week hearing in February 2025 following which the Tribunal dismissed all allegations.

KM v. CoPoM

Acting for CoPoM in complex and sensitive whistleblowing claim involving serious allegations of sex discrimination, harassment and whistleblowing detriment made by a senior female counter-terrorism officer following alleged disclosures regarding the adequacy of counterterrorism preparation and training. The matter was listed for two week hearing in September 2025 but compromised on mutually acceptable terms very shortly before.

ZM v. CoPoM

Acting for CoPoM in claim involving multiple allegations of direct race and sex discrimination, harassment on grounds of race and victimisation, including allegations against individuals at the highest levels of Met Police management; the Claimant was seeking compensation well into six figures. The matter was listed for a two week hearing in October 2025 and compromised shortly before on terms that were significantly more favourable to CoPoM.