Jack specialises in employment law and has been attending tribunals since 1993. He advises both corporate and individual clients with some recent clients including Babcock, Eurotunnel, Paul Smith, Royal Mail, Thomson Reuters, The Ritz, Terrence Higgins Trust and the BBC. When representing Claimants he has represented clients with successful claims against companies including: Lloyds Bank, HSBC and HP. Nominated as Employment Junior (2014), Jack attracts instructions in high profile claims including people in the media or sporting personalities, whose claims did not reach the public glare of court or a tribunal, including some market sensitive claims. As seen from the Directories and the Testimonials, Jack has received wide ranging praise for his expertise, sound practical advice and astute tactical direction.
In 2023, Jack represented the City of London, in a status case, including wider employment claims and issues.
Hope v BMA  IRLR 206
Representing the BMA at first instance and before the then President of the EAT, this is an important case on an employer’s ability to discipline frivolous, vexatious and repeated grievances. The decision also addresses the difference between gross misconduct and conduct dismissals. An appeal to the Court of Appeal currently remains potentially live. The EAT judgment is available here.
Newby v Newby & Paskins v HMRC ET Case No: 2400627/2020 & others
Instructed in this important age discrimination claim upon which the treatment of past and future civil servants and the compensation to which they have and will be entitled was determined. The Government (not limited to just HMRC) admitted that a scheme it operated to award compensation to civil servants was prima facie discriminatory, this case before the former President of the ET, Brian Doyle, determined whether the Government’s defence of justification could be made out.
British Airways Ltd v British Airline Pilots’ Association  EWHC 2302 (QB)
The High Court has turned down an application by British Airways for an injunction to prevent industrial action by the British Air Lines Pilots Association (BALPA). The case was heard on 23 July by Mrs. Justice Elisabeth Laing and concerned the statutory construction of various sections of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and the requirements placed on unions to comply with ballot notices, in particular the interpretation of s.226A. Simon Cheetham KC and Jack Mitchell, instructed by David Hunt of Farrer & Co, represented BALPA, having stepped in for Michael Ford KC and Stuart Brittenden, who had previously been acting for BALPA, but were unavailable for this hearing. The judgment is available here.
A week later, Michael Ford KC, Simon Cheetham KC and Jack Mitchell, instructed by David Hunt and Alice Yandle of Farrer & Co, represented BALPA before the Court of Appeal  EWCA Civ 1663. They dismissed British Airways’ appeal against the judgment of Mrs Justice Elizabeth Laing. A case heard one week after the High Court judgment, on 23 July and in a judgment handed down on 31 July, the Court accepted BALPA’s argument that the obligation on a union was to provide information about the general categories of employees, which – by providing pilots’ ranks – they had done in this case. The judgment is available here.
Adams, Adams v De la Rue International Limited Case No: 3202036/2018 & 3202037/2018
The Adams brothers brought a complex whistleblowing claim against De La Rue. Jack successfully represented De la Rue. The judgment in August 2020 is available here.
Jack led Rachel Owusu-Agyei in the EAT. Mr Badara was engaged by Pulse. He was a Nigerian national and husband to an EEA National. He was contractually required to prove his right to work in the UK. He supplied a work visa which expired, and the employer was advised by the Home Office that to continue to employ Mr Badara would be a criminal offence. That advice was acted upon and he was suspended. The advice was wrong in law. The EAT remitted the case. A copy of the judgment is available here.
Teachers: failure to consult
Jack is acting for twelve former staff, instructed by three unions, presenting claims against a former partnership running a school. Jack successfully argued to have each partner personally liable for the protected award and persuaded the Tribunal that the Respondent school had failed to establish a fair dismissal and that each former member of staff was entitled to damages for unfair dismissal.
Re: A member of the House of Lords
Jack represented a member of the House of Lords in successfully defending and avoiding claims, including obtaining restricted reporting orders.
Thomas and Others v Quinn and Liberty
Instructed for 48 of the Claimants in this group litigation, this case addressed numerous issues including status under the WTR, ERA, holiday pay, terms and the conditions of employment. The case was the subject of Presidential Direction Order number 109.
Abuse of a customer, not a fair dismissal
Jack represented the Claimant who was dismissed for allegedly physically and verbally abusing a member of the public. Despite video footage existing, Jack succeeded in obtaining an unfair dismissal judgment against the Claimant’s employer. After succeeding, the employer settled the case before the remedy decision.
Working Time Regulations
Jack represented the Respondent defending a claim of working time regulation breach based on an analysis of over a year’s tracking information, raising issues of what is working time, rest periods and rest breaks including daily rest periods, and weekly rest periods.
An unnamed bank
Jack acted for a trader who provided key information to UK and USA regulators and also then became a key witness for the Department of Justice (US). This case was settled in the UK.
Thurlbeck, Weatherup, Edmunson v Newsgroup Newspapers Limited
Jack was instructed to represent Mr Thurlbeck (former News Editor of News of the World) in his claims against that paper arising from the phone hacking scandal. Jack was successful at PHR before the London Regional Employment Judge.