Lucy has a growing employment practice and is instructed by claimants and respondents in equal measure. She has garnered a national practice over the last year, having been instructed for cases in Newcastle, Manchester and Leeds covering a wide range of issues, including:
- Unfair dismissal;
- Discrimination: race, sex, age and disability;
- Equal pay claims;
- Wrongful dismissal;
- Breach of contract.
Lucy is frequently instructed at the outset of a case to advise as to prospects of success. Recent examples include:
M (2019) – advice on prospects of success of disability discrimination, sex discrimination and victimisation claims. Involved analysing communications between colleagues and previous feedback on the promotion process to determine whether the claims had prospects.
L (2019) – advised on whether there was an unfair-dismissal claim arising out of private group Whatsapp messages with colleagues. Involved discussing the status of private messages against the backdrop of various company policies.
J (2018) – instructed for the claimant in a case concerning allegations of unpaid commission/unpaid unlawful deductions. The case focussed upon the interpretation of a complex claw-back contractual term.
C (2018) – employment claim regarding a civilian security officer working at a military base. The claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct after allegedly leaving an entrance to the military base unsecured. The claimant relied upon a custom and practice in relation to this entrance, and argued dissimilar treatment.
Seminars:
Lucy has recently presented an in-house seminar on directors’ bonus payments and 'strike out, deposit orders and costs'.
Articles:
Massages and mixed messages
Disability, deadlines and data: time limits, how strictly must they be adhered to?
Employment status: Varnish, Velodromes and Vento
Back to basics: calculating compensation in unfair dismissal claims
Cases of interest:
RG, C v PI, C, M & M (2020) – instructed on behalf of the third and fourth respondent in a TUPE case involving a public house. The public house was closed for a period of three months instead of the anticipated two weeks. The previous landlady was informed that there would no longer be a transfer. The claim was issued. One month later the third respondent leased the public house and subsequently entered into a joint lease with the fourth respondent. The case also involved changes in how the business was run behind the scenes despite the public house operating under the same name and providing the same services.
S v F (2019) – instructed on behalf of the claimant in relation to an unfair dismissal case. The issue was whether there had been a fair investigation into allegations of sexual harassment in the work place.
M v D (2019) – advised and conducted the preliminary hearing on behalf of the claimant. Drafted correspondence for the Tribunal to further particularise the claim. The claimant worked for a government organisation that failed to make reasonable adjustments upon her return to work following disability absence. The claimant was subjected to an oppressive absence procedure that did not take into account her disabilities, despite purporting to do so. The case involved delving beneath the surface to establish that the respondent had acted inappropriately, and unlawfully.
M v C (2019) – instructed for the respondent. The main issue in this case was jurisdiction. The claim was significantly out of time and the claimant was an agency worker, so could not claim for unfair dismissal.
G v I (2019) – instructed for the respondent; a large multi-office organisation. The heads of claim were constructive unfair dismissal, failure to make reasonable adjustments and failure to pay severance pay. Initially the judge wanted to determine jurisdiction only at the preliminary hearing, but Lucy effectively argued that all issues should be dealt with at a preliminary hearing on the basis that none of them have reasonable prospects of success.
B v J (2019) – instructed for the claimant through the Bar Pro Bono Unit in a case against a well-known supermarket. The central issues were disability discrimination including failure to make reasonable adjustments, constructive unfair dismissal, harassment and victimisation. Lucy was instrumental in narrowing the issues and shaping the separate heads of claim.
Testimonials:
“her abilities at such a junior stage of her career far outstripped many more experienced advocates”. Employment Judge
Clerk:
Nick Jeanes
E: nick.jeanes@albionchambers.co.uk
T: 0117 311 0307
