Naomi appears for both claimants and respondents in the ET and EAT at all stages of proceedings, from preliminary hearings covering a wide range of interlocutory issues through to final hearing and appeal. She has a substantial discrimination practice, as well as appearing in cases concerning ordinary/automatic unfair dismissal, TUPE Regulations, unlawful deduction of wages, redundancy and whistleblowing.
Naomi also has experience of representing parties at judicial mediation, drafting pleadings and advices, and representing individuals at internal disciplinary proceedings. She has represented governing bodies, NHS foundation trusts, trade unions, charities, small employers and individual employees as well as appearing in class actions.
As part of her Employment practice, Naomi accepts instructions to conduct investigations, including interviewing numerous witnesses and complainants, and producing investigation reports. She has in the past been instructed to be the investigating officer for a grievance procedure for an employee within one of the UK’s largest in-house pension fund managers.
Naomi is regularly instructed on multi-day final hearings revolving around issues of discrimination in its various forms. Naomi started 2017 successfully representing an NHS Foundation Trust in defending multiple claims of discrimination as well as an unfair dismissal claim, a case which was listed for 5 days.
In 2017, Naomi’s other cases have included an 8 day case for one of two respondents, defending claims of race discrimination in a myriad of forms, alongside automatic (whistleblowing) and ordinary unfair dismissal.
In January 2015, Naomi was led by Mohammed Zaman QC in an 11 day unfair dismissal and discrimination (race, perceived religion, age) claim brought by a former managing director of a leading UK manufacturer and supplier of prescription pharmaceutical products.
Naomi is ranked Band 3 for Midlands Employment.
“Naomi represented the Edge Hotel School at a recent Employment Tribunal hearing. It was a tense, stressful time for the team however Naomi was the epitome of professionalism and not only explained the requirements of the process clearly and concisely but even managed to reduce the stress with her good humour and relaxed but highly efficient approach. Following the conclusion of the tribunal hearing I promised Naomi that, irrespective of the outcome, I would be very happy to provide a glowing reference for her. She is an exceptional talent and I wholeheartedly commend her to you. PS. We won.”
Andrew Boer, Principal, EHS, March 2019
“Well prepared, easy to work with and good with clients.” “Professional and approachable. She gets good results and puts witnesses at ease.” “Very user-friendly and proactive.”
Chambers UK 2019
“She is professional, approachable and pleasant to work with. I had absolute faith that the case was in excellent hands.” “She can tailor her approach to the particular circumstances of the case. She was fantastic with the client - it was a difficult case and she knew it inside out, she knew exactly what the issues were (and there were lots of different legal aspects).”
Chambers UK 2018
“Good at managing clients who are upset or do not appreciate the legality of the situation, and is good at explaining things in simple terms that they can understand: she is really patient,” “She is clearly conspicuously able and very pleasant to deal with.”
Chambers and Partners 2017
Naomi Owen can turn water into wine. Lucy McLynn, Partner at Bates Wells Braithwaite, February 2015. Naomi has guided us through a particularly complicated tribunal case. She has provided us with clear and helpful advice during this most stressful process. She was always on hand to give us support making ‘direct access’ to a barrister an easy and efficient way of undertaking our case. Her well organised and thorough approach ensured that we were well prepared for the hearing. We would highly recommend Naomi who went out of her way to help and advise us throughout the whole Tribunal process.
Fira Landscape, March 2014
Naomi Owen was an outstanding advocate and presented an excellent case to the Tribunal. Her approach was very professional and she adopted a style for every stage of proceedings which no doubt assisted in the success of the case. Suffice to say that the Presiding Judge commented upon the way in which she had presented and assisted throughout the case.
Police Federation representative, August 2014
Davis-Bol v (1) Brook Street UK Ltd (2) The Secretary of State for Justice (May 2017)
This was a lengthy matter in which the final hearing, for numerous procedural reasons, spanned from April 2016 to May 2017, it in fact took place over 8 days in that 11 month period. Naomi was instructed for the First Respondent in a claim of race discrimination and unfair dismissal. The claim was successfully defended, and a costs application is being pursued.
Hollis v Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust (January 2017)
This was a 5 day case, in which Naomi successfully represented the Respondent against numerous disability discrimination claims as well as an ordinary unfair dismissal claim. The costs hearing is listed for March 2018.
Sandle v Adecco UK Ltd  IRLR 941
Having won at first instance, Naomi successfully opposed an appeal against the finding that the Claimant had not been unfairly dismissed. The case was important in that it dealt with the issue as to whether dismissal can be implied by the inaction of an agency employer.
De Souza v (1) Bolt Equity Ltd, (2) Paul Southwell and (3) Patrick Bulmer (January 2015)
Naomi was led by Mohammed Zaman QC, acting for the Respondents defending a claim for ordinary unfair dismissal as well as various heads of discrimination.
Patel v Legal Services Commission and Ors (January 2014)
For this 10 day disability discrimination, harassment and victimization claim, Naomi represented the Claimant.
Payne v Black Country NHS Foundation Trust (December 2013)
In a 5 day disability discrimination claim, Naomi was instructed by the Respondent.
M v London Underground and Anor (June 2013)
This was listed for an 8 day sexual harassment and discrimination claim, in which Naomi acted for the Claimant.
Freedman and Ors v London Borough of Kingston and Ors (January 2012)
Naomi represented 57 union members in a nine day pre-hearing review held to determine whether there had been a service provision change for the purposes of the TUPE Regulations. The services provided by those members had originally been contracted out by six local authorities, to be brought in-house following government cuts.
AM v (1) GF and (2) Balfour Beatty Rail Ltd  EqLR 428
Naomi was instructed on behalf of the Claimant in a three day harassment claim. The respondent’s appeal against the decision was unsuccessful.
Employment Lawyers Association
The Honourable Society of Lincoln’s Inn
West Midlands Employment Law Group (founding member)
Pupillage Award, Lincoln’s Inn
MA Oxon, Physics, St Hilda’s College, Oxford
MA in Legal Studies, University of Bristol
BVC, University of the West of England (received the award for highest overall mark on the BVC)