Nicholas undertakes work on behalf of union funded and high net worth claimants. He previously advised unions such as the BMA, UDM, the Balfour Beatty Staff Association, BALPA, ASCL and Nautilus International.
Nicholas is also regularly instructed by employers of all sizes. He is regularly instructed by large international financial institutions, hedge funds and Lloyd’s Insurance Syndicates and advised Hull, Carlisle and Norwich City Councils as to the lawfulness of their implementation of single status. Nicholas also regularly acts for large national and multinational companies such as the GMC, the NMC, J D Wetherspoon PLC, Jet2.com, Kelloggs, Ocado, Edinburgh Woollen Mills, River Island Group, Ambassador Theatre Group Limited, Tetrosyl Group PLC, National Express/C2C, Swinton Group PLC, DHL International PLC, Virgin Media Limited, Kwik Fit (UK) Limited, Menzies Distribution Limited, Barclays Bank PLC, Hilton International Hotels, Birmingham Metropolitan College, Cammell Laird Shipbuilders Limited, Al Jazeera International Limited, Moulton Brown Limited, The Thomas Coram Foundation for Children, Electricity North West and Co-operative Financial Services Limited. He also regularly acted for a variety of NHS Trusts, NHS Digital and for Health Education England.
Nicholas appears regularly at both appellate and tribunal level in all areas of practice. He undertakes work in the fields of wrongful and unfair dismissal, TUPE and all facets of unlawful discrimination.
WHISTELBLOWING CLAIMS
Nicholas has particular experience in whistleblowing litigation. He successfully appeared on behalf of a North West based leading Cancer Research NHS Trust defending claims of whistleblowing unfair dismissal brought by the Head of Research. He successfully appeared on behalf of the Head of Construction of a UK construction company who contended that he was dismissed as a result of disclosing fraud in the procurement of publicly funded construction contracts. The remedy sought was £1.45 million. He has also advised a leading consultant academic as to his long-standing claims of whistleblowing detriment arising from his disclosure of breaches of infection protocols by his host NHS trust. He was instructed in defence of a 10 day claim of whistleblowing brought by the CEO of an International Oil Exploitation Company. The Claimant contended that he was dismissed as a result of his disclosure of international bribery and corruption involving officials of the government of Niger. The value of the remedy sought was in excess of £30 million. Nicholas also appeared in the Court of Appeal for Health Education England in defence of a test appeal addressing whether a trainee doctor can rely on the provisions of s43K of the Employment Rights Act 1996 in order to advance a claim against HEE as an education provider (led by David Reade KC and alone in the EAT).
He was recently successfully instructed to pursue a ten day claim of whistleblowing dismissal/detriment brought by the former CEO of a series of Isle and Man and UK based Group companies. The remedy sought was in excess of £2 million. He successfully defended an 8 day claim for whistleblowing dismissal on behalf of an international financial institution. The Claimant sought damages of £2.3 million reflecting a career long loss and he successfully defended the decision on appeal in a manner which clarified the scope of the Jhuti principle. He was recently successful in defence of a 11 day claim of whistleblowing detriment/dismissal brought by the former head of a multi-academy trust in which the Claimant sought damages of in excess of £500,000.
He was recently instructed in defence of a 13 day whistleblowing claim brought by the former head of legal of a Midlands based pension fund administrator who contended that she has been subjected to repeated detriments and dismissed as a result of her disclosures of breaches of Equality legislation and corporate governance requirements within the fund. He recently successfully defended a 10 day claim brought against a Lloyd’s insurance syndicate of whistleblowing advanced by a former senior underwriter who contended that his dismissal was a result of his raising allegations of fraud as regards oil drilling operations in the sea off Vietnam. The Claimant sought a career long loss of £2.6 million.
Nicholas was recently successful in resisting an appeal to the Court of Appeal (with Protect intervening) to determine the correct approach to separability in a claim of whistleblowing in the context of the dismissal of head of UK Audit in an international bank where the Claimant was dismissed for the manner of her alleged disclosures. The Claimant unsuccessfully sought permission to appeal to the Supreme Court and Protect sought there to intervene once more.
He was recently instructed by an international plastics manufacturer in defence of a 10 day claim of whistleblowing brought by the UK Head of Operations and the Head of one of its UK sites where the claimants contend that they were dismissed as a result of alleged protected disclosures. The combined remedy sought was in excess of £1.3 million.
He is currently instructed on various status claims listed for up to 20 days addressing whether various classes of contractors are workers within the meaning of the relevant legislation.
COLLECTIVE CONSULTATION/CONTRACTUAL CLAIMS
Nicholas undertakes significant collective unlawful deductions and contractual claims. He was instructed on a collective unfair dismissal/protective award claim brought by 428 claimants against a National Bakery who asserted that they have been dismissed by their employer imposing changes to their terms and conditions of employment. Additionally he successfully appeared on behalf of 408 union backed claimants whom asserted that their employer had unlawfully failed to restore their enhanced shift and overtime payments after they agreed to a temporary variation of their contractual terms in order to assist the employer through the effects of the “credit crunch”. The value of the reduced payments amounted to £1.2 million per annum. He was successful in a test case supported by the BMA in advancing a claim on behalf of a trainee doctor as the proper construction of the pay protection provisions in the relevant national agreement regarding qualified doctors returning to training. He was instructed by the UDM to advance collective consultation and unfair dismissal claims on behalf of 371 of its members who were dismissed as a result of the closure of the Thoresby Colliery. He was further instructed to advise an international maritime haulage company as to the lawfulness of amending the contracts of 39 of its employees at a specific location or whether the same amounts to an unlawful inducement to their giving up collective bargaining.
Nicholas successfully appeared (then led by David Reade KC) on an appeal to the Court of Appeal to determine the precise interaction of the concepts of affirmation and the ‘last straw’ doctrine in the context of a claim for unfair constructive dismissal. He was instructed on a collective claim brought by the staff association of an international construction company on behalf of 27 of its members to seek to prevent the alleged unlawful removal of a historic bonus provision in their contracts of employment.
Nicholas also recently advised a teaching union as regards the proposed lawfulness of their action short of a strike.
He recently appeared for a series of care providers as to the issues arising from the (now repealed) 2021 Regulations requiring the vaccination of workers in care homes. This has addressed the lawfulness of the provisions, the discrimination issues raised thereby and if a dismissal of multiple employees on this basis triggers an employer’s obligations of collective consultation. Nicholas wa instructed in a test case determining the lawfulness of an employee’s dismissal in those circumstances.
He is instructed on a test case listed for 20 days brought by in excess of 4000 ‘Just Eat’ Couriers who seek to contend that they are workers/employees of that organisation and seek holiday pay, NMW compliant payments and unfair dismissal rights as a consequence. He is also instructed on a 11 day claim brought by a series of professional Court and Ministry of Justice interpretors/translators.
He recently secured a 7 figure settlement for a banker who suffered from cancer where his employer unilaterally removed his right to health cover in breach of its Braganza duty.
DISCRIMINATION
Nicholas acts on behalf of claimants and respondents in heavy-weight discrimination cases. He has a particular interest in the issue of the territorial scope of the Equality Act and its application outside Great Britain. Nicholas appeared before the EAT in a decision addressing the territorial scope of the Equality Act in the context of a mariner. The judgment of the EAT addressed the application of the Bleuse principal outside the territorial scope of the EU and how the same interacts with the provisions of the Equality Act 2010 (Ships and Hovercrafts) Regulations 2011.
Examples of his practice in addressing the various strands of discrimination are:
Race Discrimination
He was instructed in a high-profile claim on behalf of a claimant surgeon claiming race and religious discrimination and whistleblowing detriment. The matter was listed for twenty days and attracted significant press and Parliamentary attention as a result of the surgeon’s allegations of inadequate care being provided to Muslim children in the Midlands. He acted on behalf of a trainee claimant surgeon in an eight day claim of race discrimination/victimisation with a pleaded value of £2million. The claimant’s allegations spanned six years and he alleged that his unlawful treatment by the respondent had caused him to fail in his career as a surgeon. Nicholas successfully appeared on behalf of the respondent in a fifteen day claim of race discrimination, harassment and victimisation where an assistant manager of a public house in a national pub chain contended that he had repeatedly been overlooked for promotion because of his status as a black African male. He acted on behalf of the Embassy of the State of Qatar in an 8-day discrimination hearing involving issues of Diplomatic Immunity and the effect of such a plea on the Employment Tribunal’s ability to determine a claim against the Embassy under the Equality Act.
He recently successfully defended a 10 day claim of race discrimination brought against a major sporting governing body. The Claimant asserted 64 separate acts of discrimination/victimisation culminating in his dismissal.
He is currently instructed on behalf of an international payment business in defence of an 11 day case of sexual, racial and disability harassment/discrimination where the Claimant seeks a career long loss of in excess of £2 million.
Religion and Belief
Nicholas has a particular expertise in cases of religion and belief discrimination. He appeared on behalf of a former employee of South Yorkshire Police who asserted that his belief in the threat of a Satanic new world order amounted to a protected belief under the Equality Act and thus his dismissal amounted to unlawful discrimination. He was instructed by a national telecommunications company in the defence of a 10 day claim of religious discrimination brought by a regional sales operative who asserted that her manager was systematically abusive of Muslims. He was also instructed to advise a national print distributor as regards the potential religious harassment implications of its distribution of the special edition of “Charlie Hebdo” following the 2015 Paris attacks. He successfully appeared on behalf of an international travel company in defence of a seven day claim of race/religious harassment brought by its former head of IT arising from the dissemination of racially harassing emails within the organisation.
He was recently instructed by a prominent academic who contended that he had been the victim of race/religious discrimination and who secured an award of £3.3 million against his former employer university.
He was instructed in defence of a 13 day claim of racial harassment brought by the UK head of an international payment provider who alleges that he was systematically harassed by his US based superior. The Claimant seeks a career long loss of in excess of £2 million.
He was recently instructed in a 10 day case in defence of a claim brought by a Jewish Zionist who contends that the posting of comments on Instagram/Facebook by her colleagues as regards the Israeli response to the recent attacks amounts to religious discrimination against her.
Gender and Sexual Orientation
Nicholas also appears in significant sexual discrimination, sexual harassment and sexual orientation discrimination claims including acting for the claimant in a gender-based victimisation claim with a pleaded value of £4.3 million brought by a consultant anaesthetist against her former employer NHS Trust. He was further successful in his defence of a seven day hearing of sexual orientation discrimination brought by a homosexual male claimant against Blackpool Pleasure Beach. He appeared for the claimant on a claim with a pleaded value of £1.6 million where it was alleged that the claimant’s London city based international property firm systematically passed her over for promotion and payment of bonus by reason of her gender/nationality. He was instructed on behalf of a leading academic who contended that she has been discriminated against on behalf of her IVF treatment (and her disability/whistleblowing) by her London based employer University. The value of the remedy sought was £1.4 million and the matter was listed for nine days. He was instructed by the Claimant in a ten day sexual harassment claim brought against one of the largest sets of Barristers’ Chambers in the UK based in the North West. The Claimant was a former clerk and asserted that she had been subjected to repeated gender-based harassment by the senior criminal clerk and her colleagues. He was instructed in defence of a fifteen day claim of equal pay, gender and disability discrimination, whistleblowing and constructive dismissal involving an architect in a property development business who sought a remedy in excess of £1 million. He was recently instructed in defence of a 20 day of claim of sexual harassment and equal pay brought by the territory manager of an international financial institution.
He recently successfully defended an 8 day claim of maternity based discrimination and sex based harassment brought by a residential property manager of an London based property LLP. The remedy sought was in excess of £3million. He secured an award of £225,000 in costs against the Claimant.
Disability
Nicholas is regularly instructed in both pursuing and defending significant disability discrimination complaints. He was successful in his representation of Hull City Council before the Court of Appeal on the issue of when time starts to run for the purposes of presenting a complaint of a failure to make reasonable adjustments. He was recently instructed by a national firm of solicitors in defence of a fifteen day claim of disability discrimination and constructive dismissal brought by a solicitor who alleged that her career has been ended by the respondent’s refusal to make allowances for her physical and mental disabilities. He successfully appeared for an NHS Trust in defence of a ten day case of disability discrimination (and three days on appeal) where the claimant nurse was dismissed as a result of serious criminal offending which amounted to non-insane automatism. The claimant contended that the Trust was guilty of discrimination and further failed to make reasonable adjustments in dismissing her in those circumstances. The claim had a pleaded value of £500,000. He appeared in defence of a career long loss claim where the claimant suffered from “cluster headaches” which were described in the medical evidence as the most painful condition which a human being can suffer. He further successfully appeared for the Claimant in a ten day claim of disability discrimination, harassment and failure to make reasonable adjustments brought by an international account manager of Barclays Bank. The Claimant sought a remedy of in excess of £1 million. He was instructed by a national pub chain in defence of a 10 day claim of disability discrimination/harassment brought by an assistant pub manager who asserted that she had been forced from her role as a result of a campaign of discriminatory treatment. He successfully appeared in a 7 day claim on behalf of a former analyst at Societe Generale whom contended that his redundancy dismissal was a sham and was in fact done by reason of his multiple sclerosis. The remedy sought was in excess of £2 million.
He was recently successful in a ten day claim of direct and disability related discrimination and a failure to make reasonable adjustments on behalf of the Deputy Head Teacher of an Academy Trust whose claim seeks a remedy in excess of £450,000. He also recently appeared on an appeal to the EAT in this matter addressing the correct approach to ‘constructive knowledge’ in a case of disability discrimination.
Age
He advised the National Probation Service (South Yorkshire) as to the lawfulness of its proposed early retirement and redundancy packages. Further he was successful in his representation of the respondent in a collective challenge to the lawfulness of North West Business Link’s enhanced redundancy payments package. He was instructed by a North East based local authority to defend a claim brought by an older applicant contending that his application for a Head of Culture role was not progressed by reason of his perceived proximity to retirement. The Claimant sought a career long loss of earnings and pension valued at in excess of £600,000.
He was recently instructed in defence of a five day claim brought by female sales operative in a national furniture business who contended that she had been subjected to repeated harassment by reason of her age.
Equal Pay
Nicholas had significant involvement in the equal pay litigation which progressed in the North East of England. He acted for a number of NHS Trusts and was also instructed to represent the GMB in its defence to the Hartley challenge to Agenda for Change prior to the decision of the GMB to combine representation with the other NHS Unions. He also appeared in significant local authority equal pay work. For example he was instructed on a twenty day local authority “MF” hearing on behalf of a series of successor schools and regularly appeared in equality of value hearings before the tribunal.
He successfully defended a collective “like work” claim brought by operatives in a photographic paper factory who sought to compare their roles with those of machine operators. He successfully appeared in defence of a claim for equal pay brought by a teacher in a prestigious South East based fee-paying school whom contended that her pay as a tennis coach was unlawfully less than that of her male peers. He was instructed in defence of a thirteen day equal value claim involving allegations of gender discrimination/harassment/victimisation brought by a female Operations Director of an international retail technology consultancy. The value of the remedy sought was in excess of £500,000. Nicholas was recently instructed in defence of a significant claim for equal pay (equal value) brought by the female Design Director of a national office installation company.
He was also instructed to advise a series of Claimants in their collective equal pay claim brought against Birmingham City Council. He was recently instructed in defence of a 20 day equal pay claim advanced (on the basis of like work and equal value) by a Territory Manager of an International Financial Institution.
TUPE
Nicholas has significant experience in the area of TUPE litigation. He was successful in his representation of the GMB before the EAT in securing a judgment that the TUPE Regulations and the Acquired Rights Directive are of trans-national effect and apply outside the territorial scope of the European Union. He appeared in an appeal addressing whether TUPE applies to the MOD’s decision to award a military support contract in the Falkland Islands to a Dutch company. The decision of the EAT addressed the application of the Service Provision Change definition contained within TUPE 2006 for the first time in an international context. He was successful in the defence of an eight day case to determine the extent to which a series of senior employees employed by a group company are able to assert that they are properly ‘assigned’ to a series of transferred subsidiary companies and thus present claims of unfair dismissal. He was instructed to defend a collective unfair dismissal/TUPE consultation claim brought by 21 baggage handlers at Manchester Airport who contend that they were unfairly dismissed following a relevant transfer. The value of the remedy sought was in excess of £2 million. He was instructed by a South East based trains company in defence of a failure to consult claim brought by a union on behalf of 599 employees seeking a remedy in excess of £1.1 million.
He was recently instructed to pursue a Regulation 11 claim as regards the provision of inadequate ELI by a transferor in the context of the transfer of numerous care workers between two providers. The transferee discovered that the transferor was historically underpaying its workers and sought to claim the fine imposed against it by the Low Pay Unit from the transferor which is not a point addressed by previous authority. In addition the transferee sought to claim damages for the negative effect on its reputation by its being ‘named and shamed’ as regards this underpayment. He was also recently instructed to pursue a Regulation 11 claim as regards a transfer of a cleaning contract where the Claimant sought a remedy of £1.2 million.
He was also instructed on behalf of the successor to the Jaeger group of companies to defend TUPE consultation and notice pay claims brought by the members of the former senior management team of Jeager.
WORKING TIME/NATIONAL MINIMUM WAGE
Nicholas has particular experience in the field of the Working Time Regulations and was involved in the reference to the CJEU regarding the lawfulness of “rolled up” holiday pay. He was successful on behalf of the claimants in a test case to determine the rights of over 100 union backed harbour pilots to daily and weekly rest breaks or suitable compensatory rest. The decision was considered on appeal and the judgment of the EAT referred to the CJEU the question of the proper application of the derogation provided by Regulation 21 of the WTR and its compliance with EU law. He was recently instructed by a national security company to assess the extent to which its working patterns comply with the WTR and EU law.
He has a particular interest in the difficult issue of the interaction of holiday pay and PHI payments and the proper level of holiday pay in such circumstances. He recently advised a Magic Circle firm as to the correct manner to amend its internal policies to address holiday pay in the context of PHI. He successfully appeared in a test case backed by the BMA in order to determine whether Waiting List Initiative payments are properly to be considered in the calculation of a consultant’s holiday pay. He was recently instructed on an appeal to the EAT to determine whether the provision of a contract of employment to a worker during their engagement prevents their rights to holiday pay accruing and negatives the principle in King-v-Sash Windows.
Nicholas is regularly instructed to advise employers as regards the proper approach to holiday pay particularly in the context of overtime. He has advised several employers including the GMC, the NMC and a national health care provider.
Nicholas is also regularly involved in advising employers as to the difficult issue of National Minimum Wage compliance. For example he was recently instructed on behalf of a national food wholesaler to review their working patterns and contractual documentation to ensure their compliance with both the WTR and the National Minimum Wage. He also recently advised an international airline operator, a national fruit picking business, a chain of department stores, a national brewery and an international maritime company as to the compliance of their pay systems with the NMW and the territorial effect of the relevant provisions. He is frequently instructed to address NMW compliance in the context of uniform policies and the accommodation offset allowance.
He was recently instructed by a Championship football club to defend a National Minimum Pay claim in the EAT as regards the club’s provision of credit as regards the purchase of season tickets to its employees. As detailed in the ‘collective claims’ section Nicholas is currently instructed on behalf of in excess of 850 ‘Just Eat’ couriers in their claims for holiday pay and failure to pay the NMW.
AGENCY WORKERS
Nicholas has a particular interest in the provisions of the Agency Worker Regulations and has been instructed to advise several employment agencies as to how best to amend their business practises in order to comply with the commencement of the Regulations. He appeared in the first Employment Tribunal decision addressing the lawfulness of the implementation of the “Swedish derogation” in the contracts of seven agency workers concluded with an agency and multi-national petroleum supplier. He further advised the Police Service of Northern Ireland as to the effect of the Regulations and the “Swedish derogation” on the lawfulness of its recruitment practises. He recently advised a national social contractor as to the lawfulness of its approach to the payment of agency workers.
He recently successfully appeared on behalf of a multi-national Employment Agency in defence of a claim brought by an NHS contractor against a Trust and the Agency asserting unequal treatment of the Claimant on the basis of his agency worker status. The matter was successfully defended on appeal.