The Lawyer’s new China Elite report contains the most detailed research available on the PRC legal market and contains unparalleled insight into the country's leading law firms. They vary in size, practice focus and geographic coverage, but they all share one common quality – ambition... Read more
This year, The Lawyer’s annual ranking of the largest UK law firms by turnover is available as an interactive, digital benchmarking tool. For the first time this will allow you to manipulate each data set against the metrics of your choice.
The tribunal that found the Sinclair Roche & Temperley (SRT) partnership guilty of sex discrimination was “misguided” and failed to read crucial pieces of evidence.
Mr Justice Michael Burton, president of the Employment Appeals Tribunal, said the original tribunal had never allowed SRT to defend the claim that the partners “knowingly aided the alleged discrimination” before finding the firm guilty.
The second hearing will be heard by the original tribunal. Judge Burton has ordered a second hearing, mainly due to the fact that, despite its errors, the original tribunal was neither biased nor its decision “totally flawed”.
Judge Burton made the decision during the appeal by SRT against a decision that it sexually discriminated against two of its former partners, Sian Heard and Sian Fellows.
Judge Burton described the demands imposed on SRT’s counsel to write submissions within very tight deadlines as “worrying” and “misguided”.