Strategic advocacy and advisory work in complex employment disputes, with particular expertise in discrimination, whistleblowing, TUPE, and appellate litigation.
Approach
Cases are won in cross-examination, not on spreadsheets. But the spreadsheets help. Cambridge doctorate, a decade in publishing, legal education in Namibia, speechwriting for a Japanese Ambassador: a different route to the Bar, and a different kind of advocate.
Selected Work
Instructing Counsel
Resources and tools designed for employment law teams
All tools, calculators, and research materials on this site are for educational and informational purposes only. They do not constitute legal advice. Always verify calculations and guidance against primary sources and consult with counsel for specific matters.
Get in Touch / Resources
For instructions or advisory work, contact me directly or via St Philips clerks. Access key documents here:
Legal Research Database
Searchable database of employment law authorities with full summaries, judicial analysis, and cross-referenced statutes.
Explore Database →Practice Calculators
Instant calculators for limitation periods, notice pay, quantum, redundancy, and holiday pay. Built for speed and accuracy.
View Tools →Strategic Advocacy
Complex discrimination, whistleblowing, TUPE, and appellate work. Court of Appeal experience. Available for trial and advisory.
View Experience →Quick Access Tools
🧠 Experimental Tools
What Clients Say
A superb and effective trial counsel.
Extremely responsive, knowledgeable and delivers high quality advice in a client-friendly manner.
Excellent preparation and advocacy that secured a successful outcome in a complex multi-day hearing.
Knowledge Base
Explore key areas of employment law and leading authorities.
This knowledge base is for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. Case summaries and legal principles are simplified for reference and may not reflect the most current legal developments. Always consult a qualified professional for specific legal guidance.
List of Issues Builder
Generate a structured Word document (.docx) containing the statutory legal tests for your chosen claims.
This is an experimental educational tool for illustrative purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. The generated document contains abstract legal tests which must be populated with specific factual allegations. Always consult a qualified professional for specific legal guidance.
A Tribunal will likely reject a List of Issues that only recites the abstract legal tests. To be useful, you must edit the downloaded document to populate it with your specific factual allegations (e.g., dates of incidents, specific words used, names of comparators).
Select Claims & Jurisdictions
Recent Instructed Cases
News & Insights
Articles and insights on this site are for educational and informational purposes only. They do not constitute legal advice. Content may not reflect the most current legal developments. Always consult a qualified professional for specific legal guidance.
Video Insights
Short video commentaries on recent appellate decisions and key employment law developments.
Video content is for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. Discussions of cases and legal principles are simplified for accessibility. Always consult a qualified professional for specific legal guidance.
Coming Soon
Video commentaries on significant EAT and Court of Appeal decisions will appear here. Subscribe to be notified when new content is published.
Holiday Pay
For irregular-hours workers (52-week reference period estimate).
This is a practice tool for illustrative purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. Calculations are based on standard 52-week reference periods and may not account for complex patterns of work or specific contract terms. Always consult a qualified professional for specific legal guidance.
📐 Mathematical Basis
• $\bar{W}$ = Average weekly pay over reference period
• $P_i$ = Gross pay in week $i$
• $n$ = Number of weeks worked (max 52)
• 5.6 = Statutory annual leave entitlement in weeks
Limitation Date Calculator
Calculate the primary limitation date for Employment Tribunal claims, accounting for ACAS Early Conciliation extensions.
This is a practice tool for illustrative purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. Limitation dates are complex and may be affected by specific facts not captured here. Missing a deadline has severe legal consequences. Always consult a qualified professional for specific legal guidance.
📐 Mathematical Basis
• The primary limitation period is 3 months less one day from the effective date of termination (EDT) or the date of the act.
• ACAS Early Conciliation "stops the clock" on this period, extending it as per statutory rules (see below).
- Employment Rights Act 1996, s.111(2) (Unfair Dismissal)
- Equality Act 2010, s.123 (Discrimination Claims)
- The Employment Act 2002 (Dispute Resolution) Regulations 2004 (for ACAS early conciliation rules)
Statutory Notice Pay Calculator
This is a practice tool for illustrative purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. It calculates statutory minimum notice based on years of service and does not account for enhanced contractual notice periods. Always consult a qualified professional for specific legal guidance.
📐 Mathematical Basis
• $Y$ = Completed years of service
• Gross Weekly Pay is subject to statutory cap.
- Employment Rights Act 1996, s.86 (Statutory minimum period of notice)
- Employment Rights Act 1996, s.220-229 (Calculation of a week's pay, including statutory cap)
Redundancy Pay Calculator
This is a practice tool for illustrative purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. It calculates statutory redundancy pay based on age, service and pay (capped). It does not account for enhanced contractual redundancy. Always consult a qualified professional for specific legal guidance.
📐 Mathematical Basis
• $S_{total}$ = Total completed years of service (max 20 years used for calculation)
• Weekly Pay is subject to the statutory cap.
• Age is at the effective date of termination.
- Employment Rights Act 1996, s.162 (Amount of a redundancy payment)
- Employment Rights Act 1996, s.227 (Limit on amount of week's pay)
- Employment Rights Act 1996, s.228 (Maximum number of years' service)
Procedural Fairness Checker
This is a practice tool for illustrative purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. It provides a basic checklist for ACAS-compliant disciplinary procedures. Procedural fairness depends on the full circumstances of each case. Always consult a qualified professional for specific legal guidance.
ACAS Code Compliance Checklist
ACAS Guidance
Ackerman Bargaining Calculator
A negotiation modeling tool based on the Ackerman/Voss protocol.
This is a practice tool for illustrative purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. The Ackerman model provides a psychological framework for bargaining but does not guarantee settlement outcomes. Always consult a qualified professional for specific legal guidance.
🤝 Bargaining Protocol
• Target is your desired settlement figure.
• This protocol recommends a series of decreasing (for a payer) or increasing (for a claimant) offers, with the final offer reaching the target plus a minor, non-monetary concession.
Convergence Plot: Shows how your offers move towards your target settlement. Notice how the increments decrease in size (the "squeeze") to signal to your opponent that you are reaching your limit.
Negotiation Surface: This 3D model visualizes the "tension" of the negotiation. The Saddle Point represents the target settlement equilibrium. In game theory, this is the point where neither party can improve their outcome without the other party walking away.
📊 Case Success Predictor
4-factor weighted model calibrated with official Employment Tribunal statistics (2020-21).
This is an experimental educational tool for illustrative purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice.
Data Note: Historical success rates are derived from Employment Tribunal statistics (2020-21) and are provided for comparative context only. They do not predict the outcome of any specific case.
Influence of general tribunal statistics on this specific outcome.
Analysis Note
This model utilizes a weighted adjustment methodology. It begins with the historical baseline for the selected claim type and shifts the probability based on the strength of your case-specific evidence and legal arguments.
📚 Mathematical Foundation: General Linear Model
This tool implements a multiple regression model, a special case of the General Linear Model (GLM). Following Olsson (2002), the observed outcome $y_i$ is modelled as a linear function of independent variables:
Our application: We adapt this framework for case success prediction, where the response variable is probability of success ($P_{\text{success}}$) and the predictors are normalised factor scores:
• $H$ = Historical baseline rate (intercept $\beta_0$)
• $w_i$ = Normalised weight for factor $i$
• $S_i$ = Strength score (0-100), centred at 50
• Subscripts: L=Legal, B=Burden, E=Evidence
💰 Next Step: Settlement Analysis
Model the financial settlement range and litigation risk using this success probability.
⚖️ Bayesian Networks
Interactive probabilistic analysis for employment law.
This is an experimental educational tool for illustrative purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. Probabilities are generated by a Bayesian inference engine based on your assessments. Always consult a qualified professional for specific legal guidance.
Path Dependency: These networks enforce sine qua non logic. Where a legal element is a prerequisite for downstream elements (e.g., disability must be established before "something arising" can exist under s.15 EqA 2010), the conditional probability is locked at 0%. Sliders marked as locked reflect legal impossibility, not mere improbability.
📚 Mathematical Foundation: Bayesian Networks
This tool utilizes Bayesian Networks (BNs), a powerful probabilistic graphical model that represents a set of random variables and their conditional dependencies via a directed acyclic graph (DAG).
• $X_i$ = A random variable (node) in the network
• Parents($X_i$) = The set of parent nodes directly influencing $X_i$
• $P(X_i | \text{Parents}(X_i))$ = Conditional Probability Distribution (CPD) for $X_i$ given its parents.
Inference in Bayesian Networks, the process of computing the posterior probability of a variable given evidence, is performed using algorithms like Variable Elimination or Message Passing.
• Pearl, J. (1988). Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems: Networks of Plausible Inference. Morgan Kaufmann.
• Koller, D., & Friedman, N. (2009). Probabilistic Graphical Models: Principles and Techniques. MIT Press.
🔄 Bayesian Updating
Refine probability assessments and valuations using new evidence.
This is an experimental educational tool for illustrative purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. Bayesian updating calculates a new posterior distribution based on prior beliefs and new observations. Always consult a qualified professional for specific legal guidance.
📚 Mathematical Foundation: Bayes-Laplace Theorem
This tool implements Bayesian inference, updating prior beliefs in light of new evidence using the Bayes-Laplace formula (Bayes, 1763; Laplace, 1774):
• $P(H)$ = Prior probability — your initial belief before seeing evidence
• $P(E \mid H)$ = Likelihood — probability of observing evidence $E$ if hypothesis $H$ is true
• $P(E)$ = Marginal likelihood — total probability of evidence under all hypotheses
• $P(H \mid E)$ = Posterior probability — updated belief after observing evidence
This tool's implementation: We model uncertainty using Beta distributions for probabilities and Normal distributions for monetary values. The posterior is computed via conjugate updating, which has closed-form solutions for these distribution families.
• Bayes, T. (1763). An Essay towards solving a Problem in the Doctrine of Chances. Phil. Trans. Royal Soc. 53:370-418.
• Laplace, P.S. (1774). Mémoire sur la probabilité des causes par les événemens. Mém. Acad. Roy. Sci. 6:621-656.
• Gelman, A. et al. (2013). Bayesian Data Analysis (3rd ed.). Chapman & Hall/CRC.
⚖️ Pension Loss Calculator
Principles for Compensating Pension Loss (4th Ed, 2021).
This is an experimental educational tool for illustrative purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. Calculations are based on the Ogden Tables and standard judicial pension loss principles. Always consult a qualified professional for specific legal guidance.
Annual Pension Multiplicand
Ogden Table Lookups
Lump Sums (Accelerated Receipt)
⚖️ Quantum Estimator
Monte Carlo simulation using PERT distributions to model litigation uncertainty.
This is an experimental educational tool for illustrative purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. Values are statistical estimations generated via Monte Carlo simulation based on your assumptions. Always consult a qualified professional for specific legal guidance.
📚 Mathematical Foundation: Monte Carlo & PERT
This tool models litigation uncertainty using Monte Carlo simulation. It performs thousands of trials, sampling from probability distributions for each head of loss to generate a range of potential outcomes.
By aggregating these distributions (e.g., Unfair Dismissal + Vento + Pension), the model reveals the probability density of the total award, helping to identify the most likely settlement range.
• Malcolm, D. G., et al. (1959). Application of a Technique for R&D Program Evaluation (PERT). Operations Research.
• Vose, D. (2008). Risk Analysis: A Quantitative Guide. John Wiley & Sons.
• Palisade Corporation. (2024). Guide to Monte Carlo Simulation.
Case Law Network
Interactive map of 500+ employment law authorities, clustered by topic.
This is an experimental educational tool for illustrative purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. Clusters and connections represent topic shared between cases and are not a substitute for legal research. Always consult a qualified professional for specific legal guidance.