Ryan Anderson represented pro bono an employee who won his £25,000 claim for loss of wages against his former employer following their total failure to pay him over a 13-month period.
Unusually for an employment tribunal case, the judge also found that the threshold had been met for making a pro bono costs award against the respondent company.
The matter was referred to Ryan by the Work Rights Centre.
Background to the employment law claim
Mr S moved to the UK from India to start a healthcare role as a sponsored worker for the company.
He effectively began work, undertaking training, but was never given proper duties or paid, repeatedly being told his ‘turn’ would come.
After briefly finding alternate sponsored worker employment, he ultimately had to return to India.
Employment tribunal proceedings
Mr S was unable to get the necessary permission to give evidence from abroad so had no witness to give oral evidence in support of his case.
At the 3-day employment tribunal trial, Ryan successfully argued that his client:
- could still succeed on the basis of consistency between his written witness statement and the contemporaneous documents, despite being unavailable to give oral evidence; and
- had been an ‘employee’ (Mr S’s former employer tried to claim that he had never been employed) because he had been ‘ready, willing and able’ to perform his work duties.
Ryan also demonstrated that the company’s conduct had been unreasonable.
He persuaded the tribunal that:
- documentation put forward by the company was disingenuous and had been created for the purpose of the proceedings; and
- no reliance could be placed on the oral evidence given by the respondent, despite there being no oral evidence from Mr S in response.
Ruth Neil of the Work Rights Centre praised Ryan's representation:
‘Watching Ryan in the Tribunal was a pleasure. His cross examination was surgical and systematic. His ability to remain unfailingly respectful and polite while applying relentless pressure during cross-examination was a testament to his skill as a top rate advocate.
His detailed submissions, especially regarding hearsay evidence, were clear and highly persuasive.
For anyone looking for a barrister who combines in-depth legal strategy and advice with superb presence and skill in Tribunal, you would be very hard pressed to find someone better’.
The tribunal is due to consider the amount of the pro bono costs award in May.