A&O hit with £3.4m claim from erotic-fiction-writing former associate
Former Allen & Overy (A&O) Moscow-based senior associate Deidre Dare, who was sacked after she refused to stop publishing an online erotic novel, is claiming £3.4m in compensation over allegations of unfair dismissal and sexual discrimination.
Deirdre Dare
In a claim against the firm filed under the name of Deidre Clark she says: “I believe I was unfairly dismissed because my boss [managing partner of the Moscow office] Tony Humphrey had developed a sexual obsession with me and that all subsequent events were a direct result of that obsession.”
Dare worked at A&O between 2007 and 2009. A spokesperson for the firm commented: “We’re aware of Ms Dare’s employment tribunal claim. We’re entirely satisfied that the termination of her employment was justified and lawful and will defend Ms Dare’s claim vigorously.”
Dare claims that she and the partner “made out one drunken evening” on a colleague’s couch. In the claim she alleges: “Many witnesses were present. This was a heavy make out session and included tongues, hands on genitalia etc.”
She alleges that she was subsequently given an employment review by Humphrey in which no formal documents were involved and that her former boss accused her of being “too wild” and “not committed enough” to the man who was her boyfriend at the time.
Dare claims that she was fired after Humphrey became “crazy with jealousy” following her involvement with another man.
In her claim form Dare alleges that she introduced the client Alstom Transportation to the firm and had done a major deal for SMBC, but was nonetheless sidelined from work, which led to her becoming depressed and seeking help from a therapist.
Dare filed a formal grievance for sexual harassment with the firm’s HR department and was dismissed without notice after she refused to take down her online book - Expat: A Weekly Serialized Novel About Living in Moscow, which she argued “had been up for months, and everyone had been reading it”.
In her claim Dare says: “I believed I had every right to continue to write (…) in my personal time. Many lawyers are frustrated writers: we work with words. (…) This is gagging the entire profession and basically saying that we’re not allowed to be creative in our spare time.
“If they’d really thought that they had a right to make me stop, they would have done so months prior to when they did,” she added.
The claim continues: “One of my potential clients in Moscow said that he often sees A&O people at whorehouses and throwing up in bars. He couldn’t understand how my little book could possibly bring the firm into disrepute.”
The former Simpson Thacher & Bartlett and Milbank employee made £126,000 per year at A&O and is now earning £138 per week as a self-employed writer. She has instructed Maud Bergvelt at Hylton Potts Legal Consultants in London to represent her.
A&O has instructed Tom Linden QC at Matrix Chambers.
Readers' comments (15)
Dayglo Dave | 20-May-2010 4:44 pm
If you have an idle moment Google "Rodney Hylton-Potts". Superb. Top man! And, no, I don't work for A & O.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 20-May-2010 4:46 pm
Makes John De Belin's claim against Eversheds look like peanuts!!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Private Eye | 20-May-2010 5:15 pm
The Hylton-Potts firm not only has an interesting founder, it also has great marketing. See website:
From HPLC website: "Here at Hylton-Potts we offer a Harley Street service at local GP, National Health prices......
We have Rolls Royce service at Ford prices – Try us – you will not be disappointed.
We accept cheques, cash, debit cards, credit cards and Paypal."
Now, that's what I call style. You couldn't make this stuff up.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 20-May-2010 5:24 pm
Quoting Ms. Dare's own words, “...One of my potential clients in Moscow said that he often sees A&O people at whorehouses..."
- meaning that Ms.Dare's potential clients visit whorehouses? And effectively admit to that?
Wow.
Sounds like this quote from a "potential client" is a work of (bad) fiction on behalf of Ms. Dare.
As a long-term resident of Moscow (and as a reader of several chapters of Ms. Dare's oeuvres on her website) I can say that her imagination is totally running the show, uninhibited by even the slightest instance of fact-checking.
And, finally, thanks to Dayglo Dave above - the name partner in the law firm she retained is (for a lack of better word) - "Wow". Or "Oops" or even "Oh my God" :-)
Would love to see how this would work out in the end.
Personally, I can't understand how she slipped through A&O's selection process.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
FB | 20-May-2010 5:43 pm
The lurid details notwithstanding (and Ms 'Dare' is hardly doing herself many favours by the sound of it...), at the heart of this case lies an interesting point: to what extent does an employer have the right to interfere with an employee's private life?
'Bringing the employer into disrepute' is a dangerously broad concept, and, ultimately, decided by whom? In this case, I guess, a firm's partners; but have they all been polled? Or is the firm acting corporately? I would doubt any policy exists to cover this within the firm, and one would have to ask whether partners were subject to the same strictures as employees. I think it's a can of worms.
Do people think the firm has the right to dictate what an individual does during their spare time as long as it's not directly referencing the firm?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Cyprus Nicosia | 20-May-2010 6:39 pm
This Deirdre sounds awesome to me. I wished could work with someone like this. Most MC associates are a bit boring to be fair. I think she should sue for personality discrimination too. In that she was probably let go for having one as opposed to being a robot.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 20-May-2010 6:42 pm
Perhaps it was the dreadful writing style and grammar on display in the book, rather than the subject matter, that was perceived as likely to bring the firm into disrepute...
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
David Ufuoma Omamogho | 20-May-2010 6:44 pm
I believe every person has a write to privacy especially when it involves sensitive issues as sexual orientation and preferences;
However, it has been said your privacy or liberty ends where other's liberty begins and should not prejudice other's liberty ;
The question for me being thoroughly old school and traditional is "WHAT SPOTLIGHT DOES IT SHINE ON OUR NOBLE AND HONOURABLE PROFESSION;
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Old Timer | 20-May-2010 10:16 pm
Amazing that A&O are apparently planning to fight this and air their dirty laundry in public. Also pretty disgraceful that they are evidently willing to hang Tony Humphrey out to dray. Whilst it is possible that his behaviour has fallen below acceptable standards, I find that hard to believe, having known him to be a man of complete integrity and scrupulous honesty
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Tartan Teddy | 21-May-2010 9:27 am
These MC firms seem to have a lot of spare time and energy I blame the long hours culture myself - remember that ?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Travis Perkins | 23-May-2010 6:13 pm
Old Timer - A&O are hard nosed b*stards. Humphrey is reitring soon so they don;t care if the price of winngin aginst Ms. Dare is him going down in flames. Nice poeple, eh?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Robert Morgan | 24-May-2010 3:13 am
"Dare claims that she and the partner “made out one drunken evening” on a colleague’s couch. In the claim she alleges: “Many witnesses were present. This was a heavy make out session and included tongues, hands on genitalia etc.” "
Erm, forgive me if I am missing something, but is this somehow intended to be supportive of her case?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Double Dare | 24-May-2010 1:54 pm
Re Robert Morgan: I suspect that’s an excerpt from one of Dare’s novels as opposed to forming part of her statement of case? Oh wait, no you’re right…
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 10-Jun-2010 8:22 pm
I say good luck to her. I suspect all those who have commented that they think her allegations is all part of her over-active imagination are rather fooling themselves. Lots of people do things they shouldn't, it's just that most of them don't their doings aired in public before a Tribunal and in the press.
The problem for A&O is that they ought to have settled this some time ago; they didn't, and now much as they might like to do so, they effectively can't without giving credence to the claim. Well done. Nice work.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Baihuzi | 7-Jul-2010 8:12 am
This is a very interesting case. Dare is a seasoned lawyer, who used to work for major international law firms. Putting aside her sexual harassment claim, was she so naive to think that by making her ‘erotic’ story public she would not jeopardize her then current employment or legal career? Did she really believe that she had the right to both be part of the very conservative legal establishment and have her ‘erotic’ work made public? Isn’t it just common sense? I do not buy the argument about clients being seen in ‘whorehouses’ either. This is actually an example of private life and, unless a person decides to go public about it, it should remain private. Anyway, I wish Dare good luck with her career as a writer, as well as her sexual harassment case, if there is any ground for that.
P.S. Being an expat in Moscow myself during the same time, I can confirm that Dare’s description of the expats’ life in Moscow is quite realistic.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment