Ian Scott

Overview

Chambers & Partners says that Ian Scott is “a heavy hitting senior junior and a formidable advocate” and “he’s a barrister of choice for multi-area discrimination cases.” Ian has a strong specialist practice in employment law. He is a recognised leading junior in the field.

Ian is instructed in a substantial number of sensitive and high-value discrimination claims including whistleblowing, race and sex discrimination. Ian has detailed knowledge of employment issues in the public sector in particular the NHS and local government. For example, he recently appeared in the widely publicised NHS whistleblowing cases of Dr Hayley Dare v. West London Mental Health NHS Trust UKEATPA/0194/15/MC; and Dr K.J.Beatt v. Croydon Health Services NHS Trust UKEATPA/1133/14/JOJ.

Ian also advises and appears in private sector employment issues, both collective and individual, including sectors such as the car industry.

Ian has specialist knowledge of trade union and labour law including recognition. He is experienced in appearing before the Central Arbitration Committee.

Furthermore, Ian has trained as and has held the position of a part-time employment tribunal judge. In addition, to his legal background he has an M.Sc. in Industrial Relations from the London School of Economics and has experience as an elected councillor in a London borough.

Expertise

Employment & Discrimination

Ian is a recognised leading junior in employment law. He has wide experience of providing advice to and representing both Claimants and Respondents in high-value and complex employment law issues. He has particular expertise in whistleblowing, disability, race and sex discrimination claims and regularly deals with complicated multi-area discrimination proceedings. He also has specialised knowledge of the health service and local government. His range of expertise extends to collective labour law and trade union matters including recognition and is experienced in appearing before the Central Arbitration Committee. His discrimination practice also encompasses cases involving alleged discrimination on grounds related to trade union membership (section 146 TULR(C) A) and other issues related to industrial relations including time off for trade union duties and activities. Ian has also appeared before the Nurses and Midwives Council dealing with disciplinary issues.

In addition to his recent reported work described above, the range of Ian’s abilities and experience is illustrated by the following examples of appeal cases that he has appeared in:

In Chief of West Midlands Police v. Gardner Eq LR 20 Ian represented Mr Gardner in the Police Authority’s EAT appeal concerning Mr Gardner’s disability discrimination claim that reasonable adjustments had not been made by the police authority.
In Dr Salem v. Humber Health NHS Trust. UKEAT/0169/ Ian represented the Trust in the Employment Appeal Tribunal dealing with Dr Salem’s appeal concerning the enforceability of his compromise agreement.
In Tapere v. South London and Maudsley NHS Trust IRLR 972 Ian appeared for the Trust in a groundbreaking case concerning the interpretation and application of Regulation 4(9) of TUPE 2006 and the effect of a mobility clause post a TUPE transfer.
In Masterfoods v. Wilson ICR 370 Ian appeared in the EAT for Masterfoods in a claim concerning contractual rights of appeal.
In Farrell, Matthews and Weir v. Nina Hansen ICR 509 Ian appeared in the EAT for the solicitors firm in a claim concerning the right to discretionary bonuses and unlawful deductions from wages.
In Gill & Others v. Ford Motor Company Ltd IRLR 840 Ian appeared for Ford Motor Company in a claim whether loss of wages for industrial action were excluded from unlawful deductions claims under the ERA.
In RMT v. Midland Mainline Ltd. CA IRLR 813 Ian appeared with John Hendy QC on behalf of the Union concerning the procedural requirements of strike ballots.
In Care First Partnership v. Roffey. CA ICR 87 Ian appeared on behalf of Mrs Roffey and others who had blown the whistle about alleged poor standards of care in the residential home.
In Diakou v. Islington Unison. “A” Branch ICR 121 Ian appeared for the trade union and successfully resisted the claim of race discrimination against it.

Recent and current work

Relevant Work

Mr C Moran & Others v. Ideal Cleaning Services Ltd (1) Celanese Acetate Ltd (2) ICR 442.
Ford Motor Company Limited v. Mr K Elliott & Others UKEAT/0327/14/MC.
Croydon Health Services NHS Trust v. Dr K.J.Beatt UKEATPA/1133/14/JOJ.
Mr Sandy Elijah Jacobs v. South West London & St Georges Mental Health Trust. UKEAT/0379/14/DM.
Croydon Health Services NHS Trust v. Mrs P.K. George. UKEATPA/0227/15/JOJ.
Ian’s most recent reported case in the Employment Appeal Tribunal was Ford Motor Company Limited v. Mr K. Elliott & Others UKEAT/0327/14/MC. The case concerns a multi-party claim of age discrimination by the company’s pensioners which required the interpretation of the ambit of section 108(1) of the Equality Act, 2010 governing “Relationships that have ended”. The Employment Tribunal was held to have applied the wrong test when assessing whether section 108(1) of the Act applied.
Ian also recently appeared in the EAT in the case of Elijah Jacobs v. South West London & St Georges Mental Health Trust UKEAT/0379/14/DM. The case concerned the scope of the required investigation in career ending dismissals including A v. B IRLR 405 EAT; and Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust v. Roldan ICR 1457.
Ian also appeared in the widely commented on agency workers EAT judgment concerning the meaning of ‘temporary’ in the Agency Worker Regulations 2010 (in force from 1 October 2011). There is no previous authority on the meaning of the Regulations: Moran & Others v. Ideal Cleaning Services Ltd IRLR 172. Permission has been granted for appeal to the Court of Appeal.
As indicated above Ian has recently conducted the high profile NHS whistleblowing cases of Dr Hayley Dare v. West London Mental Health Trust (Employment Tribunal Case No.3300052/; UKEATPA/0194/15/MC) and Dr K. J. Beatt v. Croydon Health Services NHS Trust (UKEATPA/1133/14/JOJ).
Ian also recently appeared in the EAT in Cleeve Link Ltd v. Bryla ICR 264; IRLR 86 dealing with the important current issue of law of whether a repayment agreement reached with an employee recruited in Poland amounted to a penalty clause and whether the repayment sum was an unlawful deduction of wages.