Employment Law

Chandra has over 30 years’ experience in employment law, in Tribunals and appeals, since he first started representing employees for the Free Representation Unit in 1993.  Most of his cases now are instructed directly by the public on the Bar’s Direct Access Scheme, mainly through referrals.  Most of Chandra’s cases have been discrimination cases and he specialises in these.  Chandra has also, through referrals, gained an expertise in particular areas of employment, especially professionals such as in medicine (doctors and nurses) and education (teachers, teaching assistants and coaches), and the associated regulatory bodies.

NB: The cases reported below are anonymised as if they are subject to settlement agreements/COT3s they will be subject to a confidentiality agreement with a sub-clause enabling anonymised entry on my website with limited details.

M v ASCC (2024)

MDD was a teaching chef in a cookery school and got pregnant.  When she asked for various safeguarding measures to be done and a health and safety assessment she was subjected to a quasi-disciplinary meeting and went off sick.  When she returned she was told she was at risk of redundancy in 3 days time and she was then dismissed - before she was entitled to maternity leave and having planned 3-6 more months working before the baby was born.  Settled for a substantial sum after liability was decided in MDD's favour at Tribunal but before the remedy hearing.

N v AE (2022)

N was a helpline worker for a large multinational's main British support line/call centre and was forced to resign after a disciplinary allegation based on complex figures about response times.  Having resigned, N realised that she had been forced to resign on the basis of incorrect figures and tried to get the job re-opened which was refused, whereupon she made an application to the Tribunal for constructively dismissal. The case was settled favourably for a substantial sum.

L v U (2017)

L was the Intranet Manager globally for a large multinational and was told she was redundant while on maternity leave after 9 years with U, despite the company still having an Intranet.  L complained of maternity and sex discrimination, and unfair dismissal, due to failures in law in relation to redundancy during maternity leave and previous non-promotion and pay.  An extensive grievance was put in, and an SAR, after which settlement discussions started.  Two originating applications (the latter covering appeals) and a schedule of loss were lodged and the Tribunal made orders. The case was settled favourably a month prior to the main hearing.

W v S (2015)

W was a Business Records Manager (Intranet and Compliance) globally for a large multinational with 20 years experience in S and worked mainly from home due to the international nature of her work and timezone management which meant she had a line manager and a dotted line manager.  Following a new line manager being appointed her employment conditions were unilaterally varied and then her job internally advertised and she was told she could comply with the new job T&Cs or would be made redundant.  She refused and went on sick leave. While this happened her husband was taken seriously ill and she was put under pressure to say when she would return form sick leave to make a decision about the new job.  Eventually her sick leave entitlement ran out, by which time she was pregnant with her fifth child, and she returned to work and was told to accept the new job or be made redundant at which point she lodged an extensive grievance which was rejected.  She appealed and while the appeal was pending she was offered a new job within the company that was under her old dotted line manager, now as line manager, and essentially replicated her previous role which she accepted.  The whole process from the initial representation to the final job offer was 18 months during which all the letters and written representations were drafted by Counsel with accompanying documents and bundles.

W v Patcham High School and Brighton Hove City Council [2013]

Teacher unfairly dismissed got maximum award (£78750).

M v Virgin Media [2014]

Cable Box Installer/Driver picked on by managers won constructive dismissal case.

G v HPC [2014]

Race discrimination case (car mechanic) settled for substantial amount of money

CJ v UKCC (2001) (putative judical review)

CJ (a nurse) was sacked and then reported to the UKCC for allegedly having given a 2nd dose of aspirin to a child.  She was not removed from the register (as applied for) but was suspended, despite the child's mother having made it clear there had only been one dose.  Reasons were asked for under the common law duty but denied by the UKCC and judicial review was advised by Chandra.  A nurse researching a PH.D on the UKCC for two years said it was the first case he had seen where a nurse had not been removed from the register when pursued by the UKCC (now the Nursing and Midwifery Council).

The case was then given to another barrister who recommended challenging the decision by appeal by case stated.  The High Court refused the application stating that it had to be done by judicial review.  The case was then returned to Chandra to settle the judical review but by that time it was out of time.  Chandra applied and asked for an extension of time.  The UKCC responded that in the meantime another case had succeeded in the High Court on the same point (that the UKCC was under a common law duty to provide reasons - Brabazon-Drenning v United Kingdom Central Council [2001] HRLR 6) and so agreed to quash the UKCC decision against CJ by consent.  That was the last case Chandra was instructed on by that firm of solicitors.

Adepoju v Whitbread (EAT) - [2001] UKEAT 0809_00_1105, EAT/0809/00
Inadequate reasons of Tribunal on law and findings of fact

O’Brien v Boker Aeroclean (EAT)
Right of Applicant to his own choice of legal representative

MM v SBHA [1997]

Race discrimination case (nurse) settled for substantial amount of money