Robert Lassey

Employment

Robert practises in all areas of Employment law. Since completion of his Pupillage in 2017, he has quickly developed a formidable track record of appearing on behalf of both Claimants and Respondents in a wide range of demanding cases. With a particular focus on multi-day and multi-week discrimination, unfair dismissal, and whistleblowing cases, Robert’s practice also extends to dealing with other complex hearing types including matters pertaining to territorial jurisdiction, TUPE transfers, applications for interim relief, restrictive covenant and breach of contract / wage disputes, cause of action / issue estoppel, re-instatement / re-engagement orders, applications for costs, and high-profile appeals to the EAT / Court of Appeal.

Recent examples of his work include:

EAT

• A high-profile 2-day appeal before the President of the EAT concerning the correct approach to practicability and/or contributory fault under s.116 ERA 96 (The British Council v Sellers [2025] EAT 1 – leading authority on re-engagement);
• A successful appeal before the President of the EAT concerning the correct approach to claims of discrimination arising from disability under s.15 EQA 10 (Marshall v East and North Hertfordshire NHS Trust [2025] EAT 46);
• A successful appeal against a lay-majority finding of direct race discrimination concerning a Council’s investigation into claims of misconduct by a care worker (Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council v Bonsu [2023] EAT 74 – leading authority on internal consistency in majority decisions);
• A successful and well-publicised appeal on procedural irregularity concerning the dismissal of a labourer for the assertion of a statutory right (Stone v Burflex (Scaffolding) Ltd [2021] UKEAT 0246/20, [2021] LELR 750 – leading authority on procedural irregularity); and
• A successful defence of an appeal pertaining to an ET’s decision to grant a ‘de minimis’ award at a remedy hearing following an initial Rule 21 judgment (Bertrand v Steinhoff UK Retail Ltd [2018] UKET 1400960/2017).

ET

• Appearing alone for five Respondents against two Claimants in a complex 17-day claim involving over 200 allegations of discrimination across five protected characteristics (judgment not available for reasons of confidentiality);
• Representing the Claimant in a 15-day hearing in the first part of a complex and long-running equal pay dispute between a national training provider and a senior company Director (ongoing);
• Representing two Respondents in an 11-day claim for constructive dismissal concerning allegations of disability, sex, maternity, and part-time worker discrimination by a primary school teacher (ongoing);
• Appearing alone for two Claimants in a 15-day whistleblowing / unfair dismissal complaint concerning the dismissal of three car plant operatives accused of bullying (Flanagan (1) Rothery (2) & Flanagan (3) v Vauxhall Motors Ltd [2023] UKET 2405923/2019); and
• Representing the Respondent in a 6-day claim for sexual harassment involving multiple allegations of sexual assault, abuse of managerial power, and the exchange of intimate bodily photographs over social media. Following the dismissal of her claims, the Claimant was ordered to pay the Respondent £11,300 in costs. (Liability judgment not available for reasons of confidentiality. Costs judgment available at: A v B & C [2023] UKET 1805728/2021).

Robert also enjoys a considerable drafting practice. He is frequently instructed to settle pleadings and provide advice in high value claims on complex points of law and strategy. He is similarly adept at handling discrimination and/or employment-related contractual disputes in the County / High Court and welcomes instructions in this regard.
Recent instructions have included:

• Drafting grounds of complaint in a complicated 25-day whistleblowing claim against a well-known global media corporation;
• Advising a senior company executive on a high-profile breach of contract claim in the High Court valued at over £400,000;
• Drafting grounds of resistance for a national distribution business accused of wrongful dismissal and breach of contract by an ex-manager; and
• Drafting grounds of complaint for a Senior Solicitor accused of gross misconduct and breach of contract by a national law firm.

Whilst at university, Robert was previously involved with a number of community-based fundraising and volunteering endeavours, successful in amassing over £100,000 for local causes; a charitable spirit which he maintains in practice by volunteering with several Employment law pro-bono initiatives including; ELAAS, Advocate, and FRU.

Sport

As an employment law specialist, Robert’s practice also extends to encompass various sports law disputes where he is frequently instructed to provide advice and representation in a wide variety of high-profile and sensitive cases.

Recent examples of his work include:

• Representing a football manager in a claim for unfair dismissal against a well-known national club; and
• Representing Fylde FC in various employment disputes.

Owing to his particular expertise in this area, Robert was also recently invited to co-author an article for LawInSport on the implications of the government’s new ‘Employment Rights Bill’ for sports organisations.

Alongside his busy employment practice, Robert is also frequently called upon to represent participants before sports disciplinary panels; most commonly in respect of football referees and other match officials charged with misconduct offences by the FA.

Mediation

Robert is a qualified Civil, Commercial, and Workplace Mediator and provides mediation services in a wide array of cases. With a particular focus on workplace relations, he is keen to develop his practice further in this area.

Criminal

Robert has developed a thriving Crown Court practice, undertaking all aspects of Criminal work. He is consistently instructed by both the prosecution and defence and is currently a Category 2 Prosecutor.

Robert has experience of being led in high-profile criminal trials, having acted for both the defence and the prosecution in this capacity. Robert acted for the defence in Operation Doubrava, a large-scale, multi-handed 7-week People Trafficking case at Nottingham Crown Court. He has also acted for the defence in a case involving multiple historic sex offences and has previously been instructed by the CPS as disclosure junior in the highly publicised Paul Croft murder trial. He also offers advice and representation on appeals in the Court of Appeal.

Recent examples of his work include:

Led Junior:

• Led junior in Operation Doubrava, an 11 defendant, 7-week people trafficking trial. Robert represented one of four leading defendants in an extended family network who was charged under the Modern Slavery Act 2015 with the exploitation and forced labour of around 30 foreign nationals (R v Pelcis & Others).
• Led junior for the defence in a 3-week historic sexual abuse trial with a 22-count indictment. After achieving acquittals in respect of most counts, the Crown sought a retrial in respect of the remaining four counts on which the jury could not reach a verdict. Following a successful abuse of process argument, the Crown were permitted a retrial in respect of 2 counts, neither of which resulted in a conviction (R v Maddox).
• Disclosure junior for the Crown in the successful prosecution of a historic murder case. Working closely with both leading and junior Counsel, Robert oversaw the extensive disclosure regime, which comprised large volumes of both sensitive and non-sensitive material from an investigation that spanned over ten years (R v Wilde & O’Neill).

Junior Alone:

• Successfully appealed against sentences of 24 months’ imprisonment imposed for four breaches of a Restraining Order. Robert argued that the sentencing Judge had mis-applied the guidelines when arriving at a decision as to categorisation. The Court of Appeal agreed, concluding that the sentences passed were manifestly excessive, replacing them all with sentences of 12 months’ imprisonment (R v Ahmed).
• Successfully represented a defendant in Newton hearing. The defendant had pleaded guilty to 4 charges (dangerous driving, driving with excess alcohol, driving with no insurance and failing to stop for the police), but disputed the Crown’s version of events as to the nature of his conduct. Following evidence and submissions from both parties, the Judge accepted the defence case and passed a suspended sentence (R v D).
• Obtained a suspended sentence in respect of two offences of possession with intent to supply cannabis, despite the defendant having received a previous conviction for the same offence (R v Yeboah).
• Successfully argued that the mandatory minimum sentencing provisions should not apply to a sixth offence of possession of an offensive weapon. Despite the defendant having recent previous convictions for analogous offences in similar circumstances, the Judge was persuaded to impose a suspended sentence (R v Rennalls).
• Obtained a suspended sentence for offences of dangerous driving and driving with excess alcohol, despite the defendant having been involved in collision with a pedestrian which caused serious and long-lasting injury (R v Bhayat).
• Represented a Deputy Head Teacher at prestigious private school, who was charged with assault after deliberately shooting a pupil under his care with a rapid-fire airsoft rifle during an after-school recreational club. The court accepted Robert’s submissions that this was a momentary “lapse of judgement” in an otherwise impeccable 30-year teaching career and sentenced the defendant to a community order (R v Gitlin).
• Represented a care home worker charged with assault on a resident. The prosecution were forced to offer no evidence against the defendant after Robert exposed a fatal deficiency on the schedule of unused material on the day of trial (R v Collier).

Articles

• Impending UK sports employment reforms: zero-hours, maternity, day 1 protections
• ‘The Last Rights?’ Accessing Rights to Information and Consultation in the Time of Covid-19
• ‘When Hard Work Doesn’t Pay’ A Review of the Working Time and the National Minimum Wage Frameworks
• ‘Barely Recognisable’ The Case for Reform of Schedule A1 of TULR(C)A 1992
• ‘In Defence of the Status Quo’ Employment Status & The Taylor Review: A Gig Perspective
• ‘Service Contracts: Just Another Hair Brained Scheme?’

Appointments

Committee Member, Employment Law Bar Association

Guest Lecturer, BPP Law School, Manchester

Associations

ELBA, ELA, ELAAS, FRU, Advocate

Education

LLM, Employment, Work and Equality, Bristol University

LLB (Hons), BPTC, LLM (PLP), BBP Law School, Leeds

BA (Hons) French Studies and History, Lancaster University

Awards

Megarry Scholarship, Lincoln’s Inn

Advocacy Scholarship, BBP Law School

Prescribed Information

Robert Lassey is a practising barrister, regulated by the Bar Standards Board (BSB). The information held by the BSB about him can be found here.

Robert’s clerks will provide no obligation quotations for all legal services that he provides. Their contact details can be found here. It is most common for Robert to undertake Court and Tribunal work for a brief fee plus refresher days, although fixed fees are available. Robert also accepts instructions on legal aid rates where those are available, details of which can be found here. For paperwork, Robert most commonly charges at an hourly rate, although fixed fees are available. Robert will typically return paperwork within 7-10 days, however professional commitments, complexity and volume of documentation can affect these approximate timescales.