In Ms. R Kaur v Gillen De Alwis Solicitors Ltd a solicitor dismissed after raising concerns about her firm to the Solicitors Regulation Authority has been awarded more than £36,000 by an employment tribunal.
Kaur, who represented herself, was employed under a two-year training contract. The property division where she worked was short-staffed and the employed solicitor who ran the department died shortly before Kaur joined.
In judgment, employment judge Leonard-Johnston said: ‘From the evidence before me it is clear that from the outset the firms’ leadership had not put effective systems in place to manage the workload of the property department, to manage human resources or to supervise the members of staff who were not legally qualified.’
He added: ‘I find that the respondent failed to fulfil the fundamental purpose of the training contract in that it did not provide training to the claimant. The claimant was given insufficient supervision and training, was treated as if she were a qualified lawyer and criticised for not being so, and the claimant was blamed for problems which ultimately arose out of the failure of the firm’s management to properly supervise and manage the practice.
‘The respondent also breached the implied term of trust and confidence by subjecting the claimant to behaviour that constituted bullying and harassment.’
‘The claimant was seriously concerned about the disorganisation and lack of management, because of the negative impact that this was having on the clients of the firm who were receiving a poor service. The claimant viewed the issue as a matter of protecting consumer rights.’
The judge found the firm was not entitled to dismiss Kaur without notice as she was not guilty of gross misconduct.
Finding Kaur had been unfairly dismissed, the judge added: ‘Particularly in relation to the timing of her dismissal, I find that the claimant has established it is more likely than not that the reason for her dismissal was the complaints she was making about the firm’s management.’
Kaur was awarded £36,062 for her unfair dismissal claim and was awarded a further £362, the statutory one-week notice period, in relation to the breach of contract.
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
