Jessica Smeaton - Employment
Jessica has a busy practice in the employment tribunal and acts on behalf of both claimants and respondents. In addition to court representation Jessica advises on all aspects of tribunal litigation, including unfair dismissal, equal pay and discrimination and provides day-to-day advice on employment issues and employee relations.
She is well-placed to undertake matters involving an overlap between employment and immigration issues including unfair dismissal and discrimination claims concerning the right to work.
Jessica has up to date experience in cases concerning employee status and the applicability of TUPE.
Prior to joining the Bar Jessica worked in the pro bono department at Hogan Lovells LLP, advising and representing clients in a range of matters including corporate law, employment, immigration, landlord and tenant, and a broad range of human rights work. She is experienced in advising charities and start-up social enterprises on employment rights. Jessica continues to undertake pro bono employment work for charities and social enterprises.
Wolfe v North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust  ICR 960: two day appeal acting for the appellant employee in an appeal and cross-appeal concerning the requirement on tribunals to consider the question of recurrence within schedule 1 part 1 paragraph 2(2) of the Equality Act 2010 where not expressly raised below.
B v College of Haringey, English and North-East London: five day hearing acting for the respondent in a claim of race discrimination and victimisation following budget cuts. Claim withdrawn after four days.
W v Worcester Acute Hospitals NHS Trust: two day hearing acting for the respondent in a claim for disability discrimination. The hearing required sensitive handling given previous negative press and the nature of the allegations raised. Claim dismissed.
Bandara v British Broadcasting Commission: seven day hearing acting for the claimant in a claim of unfair dismissal and race and philosophical belief discrimination. Claimant alleged that he had been dismissed for misconduct following discrimination due to his perceived support for the Tamil Tigers. Claim dismissed.
F v Millbank: acted for the claimant in a case which necessitated tracing the respondent through a number of TUPE transfers in order to establish liability. Successfully obtained a costs order against the respondent due to its unreasonable conduct in the manner in which the claim had been defended
R v BPI: six day hearing acting for the respondent in a claim for constructive unfair dismissal and religion and sexual orientation discrimination. The claimant maintained that he had been subjected to years of taunting and bullying at the hands of his colleagues. As a heterosexual, catholic man he found it offensive to be called 'gay'. Claim dismissed.
Employment Lawyers Association
Employment Law Bar Association
European Masters in Human Rights and Democratisation, European Inter-University Centre of Human Rights and Democratisation, Venice and Université de Montpellier 1
LLB Law. University of Leeds.