This book includes a plain text version that is designed for high accessibility. To use this version please follow this link.
40


Specialist Advocate


OCTOBER 2013


Employment Law Edward Legard


14 Toft Green | York | YO1 6JT 33 Broad Chare | Newcastle upon Tyne | NE1 3DQ Tel: 0844 3351551 Fax: 0190 461 0056 | 0191 261 0043 DX: 65517 York 7 | 61001 Newcastle clerks@derestreet.co.uk www.derestreet.co.uk


Employment Law is a fast-paced and ever-changing landscape. With numerous regulatory changes having been introduced over the last couple of years, we speak to Edward Legard, head of the employment team at Dere Street Barristers, about his work as a barrister within this practice area and how he handles the challenges that so many changes throw up.


Please tell us a little about yourself and your professional background.


I have been a Barrister for 17 years, an employment specialist for around 12 of those years and a Mediator since 1999. Initially centred on the North East, my practice now covers the length and breadth of the British Isles (including Scotland). I cover all major aspects of employment and equality law and my caseload comprises a broadly even split of Claimant and Respondent work.


I have a strong appellate


practice and appear regularly before the Court of Appeal and EAT. Employment Judge.


I also sit as a part-time


Our employment team is one of the largest in the North East. We can cover a broad spectrum of employment and equality work at all levels. Whether a relatively straightforward unfair dismissal dispute or a high value, complex discrimination case, there is an individual within the team with the knowledge, experience and ability to meet the challenge.


areas of Practice We represent employees and employers; from school cleaners and Trade Unions to multinational Plcs, local authorities and NHS trusts. Members of the team lecture extensively and we are also able to provide in-house training.


What are the main challenges raised when dealing with cases within the employment sector?


One of the key challenges for employment specialists is to remain one step ahead of legislative change. As practitioners, we have to be both dynamic and flexible. Employment law and procedure is in a constant state of flux,


www.lawyer-monthly.com


requiring regular updating on recently published cases or the scrutinising of new legislation. As a team we feed off one another and keep ourselves at the cutting edge of employment law through regular team briefings and the sharing of experience.


A practice in employment law will expose the practitioner to one of the most diverse areas of law and practice. One day you could be defending a nursing home and the next you might be acting for a union on behalf of a large number of employees engaged in industrial action.


In recent years I have defended a sex


discrimination complaint where the allegation was one of rape; represented peripatetic oil workers from Dubai and appeared on behalf of Leeds United (sadly, in my professional, not footballing, capacity)! Each day brings with it a fresh challenge but the ‘job’ remains rewarding and full of interest.


What are the main differences between public and private companies when it comes to the cases you deal with?


I believe most practitioners would say that, on the whole, it is easier to deal with (and for or against) private companies. When dealing with private companies one tends to encounter greater flexibility. Personal accountability can often be harder to track down in cases concerning public companies (and particularly public authorities) and that is sometimes combined with relatively high levels of bureaucracy. For example, this may produce unnecessary delay and frustration when it comes to obtaining authorisation in order to settle a case.


On the other hand, in most (but by no means all) cases, HR practices are often more robust and


there is greater pay transparency within public companies.


Have there been any legislative changes in this area in your jurisdiction recently? do you see the need for any?


The employment jurisdiction is an ever-changing landscape as successive governments try and outdo their predecessor in effecting that change. Over recent years (and indeed months) there have been a number of well-publicised changes within the employment sphere, some procedural and some substantive. By way of example, new tribunal rules of procedure have been introduced and fees are now chargeable. The latter is perhaps the most significant change of all and, in my view and despite the remission system, will have a profound impact upon the ability of the individual to access the law in order to protect his or her employment rights.


The introduction of a ‘public interest’ test for whistle-blowing cases is a long overdue but welcome move.


I see the need for further


simplification in TUPE law; further clarification on the circumstances in which sick employees can claim unused holiday pay and an extension to the jurisdiction of Tribunals to enable them to deal with contract claims that are not dependent upon termination of employment. LM


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140