Employment & Discrimination:
Daisy regularly appears in multi-day final hearings, costs hearings, and judicial mediations. She has been successful in a range of cases, including against barristers many years her senior.
Daisy has represented claimants and respondents in a range of employment matters including TUPE, trade union dismissals, unlawful inducement, whistleblowing, discrimination, flexible working, unlawful deductions from wages, and disputes on international jurisdiction, applicable forum, and the territorial scope of legislation.
Recent work
- Currently instructed in a discrimination/harassment claim concerning the scope of protection afforded to transgender employees.
- Currently instructed to defend various discrimination claims brought by Irish Travellers against pub landlords in the civil courts.
- Successfully represented a claimant doctor in a five-day victimisation hearing. The claimant had raised allegations that the respondent’s pay system may disadvantage overseas-qualified doctors. The respondent argued that it had not terminated the doctor’s locum contract because of the protected act, but because of the manner in which he made the protected act, namely that he had approached pay negotiations inappropriately.
- Successfully represented the respondent in a two-week whistleblowing trial: Cox v Adecco. This was a case in which the claimant had, twice, successfully appealed to the EAT on preliminary matters before the case reached a final hearing in the tribunal.
- Successfully represented a foreign government in a dispute over whether the Employment Tribunal had international jurisdiction under post-Brexit legislation (section 15C of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982) to hear a claim brought by a consultant working remotely in London. The Tribunal determined that the claimant did not have an “individual contract of employment” with the respondent and, accordingly, the tribunal did not have international jurisdiction to hear the claim.
- Assisted Ben Cooper KC and Robert Moretto in preparation for Ghosh v Judicial Appointments Commission. The claimant, an applicant for the role of Deputy High Court Judge, brought a claim against the Judicial Appointments Commission for direct and indirect race discrimination.
- Successfully represented a respondent GP Practice in an eight-day hearing. An ex-Partner of the Practice brought a claim (with a pleaded value of over £150,000) for sex and maternity/pregnancy discrimination and constructive expulsion under ss.44 and 46 Equality Act 2010. The claimant alleged that the partners had unlawfully made significant financial decisions about how to run the practice during Covid without her input, and that this had forced her to resign from the partnership.
- Succeeded in a costs application against a claimant who had been legally represented up until the costs hearing. The respondent was awarded 100% of its claimed costs on the basis that the claimant had unreasonably pursued claims which had no merit.
- Successfully represented the claimant in five-day reasonable adjustments claim. The claimant’s employer had refused (on the basis of its own HR advice) to move him to another role, despite evidence that his role was exacerbating his anxiety.
- Successfully represented the respondent in a five-day religious discrimination hearing. The claimant, a social worker, made allegations that she had been instructed by her employer, a Council, to wear a rainbow-coloured lanyard at work. She claimed she had refused to do so on the basis of her faith.
- Assisted Nadia Motraghi KC in drafting allegations in preparation for a disciplinary hearing under a Trust’s MHPS policy.
- Successfully represented the claimant in a four-day disability discrimination and unfair dismissal hearing. This claim involved long term sickness absence during the pandemic. At a separate remedy hearing the claimant was awarded his full Schedule of Loss. This included compensatory losses for a period of more than one year post-dismissal (despite the claimant not having applied for any other jobs) on the basis that he could not reasonably be expected to look for work earlier. The tribunal also awarded the full 25% Acas uplift on the basis of a failure by the respondent to conduct the necessary investigations to establish the claimant’s medical position.
- Successfully represented the claimant, a minister of religion, in a three-day hearing to establish worker-status, cross examining multiple witnesses with the assistance of a Punjabi translator.
- Attended a strike injunction in the High Court with Rebecca Tuck KC, acting for the union in defending the application by the employer. The matter in issue concerned whether the ballot paper complied with s.229(2D) TULR(C)A 1992: that the voting paper must indicate the period of time within which the industrial action is expected to take place.
Appellate work
- Instructed in an appeal to the EAT taking place later this year, on behalf of a corporation. The appeal concerns the application of time limits in the tribunal.
- Successfully resisted an appeal against a Registrar’s Order in the EAT.
