Katherine ANDERSON 560x670 1

Katherine Anderson

Year of Call: 2005
Email Address: [email protected]
Telephone: 0117 928 1520

How to use the Shortlist tool?

Clerks Details

  • Clerk Name: Russell Porter
  • Clerk Telephone: 01865 793736
  • Clerk Email: [email protected]
  • Clerk Name: Gemma Faulkner
  • Clerk Telephone: 020 7583 8055
  • Clerk Email: [email protected]

Employment and discrimination

Katherine is an experienced employment law specialist who has acted for and advised claimant and respondent employers in the private, public and not-for-profit sectors.

She offers particular expertise in relation to disability and other discrimination cases with a personal injury mental health aspect.

By way of example, recent cases include:

  • A claim of alleged disability discrimination, relating to depression and  stress at work, providing detailed advice in relation to case preparation
  • Representation of a claimant manager in a high value claim for unfair dismissal and victimisation
  • Representation of a respondent manager defending a race discrimination claim brought by the deceased’s executors with a high value personal injury aspect
  • Representation of a respondent School Governing Body in relation to an unfair dismissal claim brought by an employee accused of lying about her qualifications
  • Representation of a respondent nursery provider in relation to an unfair dismissal claim brought by an employee accused of sexual abuse of a child
  • An alleged constructive “whistle-blowing” dismissal where the employee complained of a dangerous workplace

She has undertaken a number of successful judicial and private mediations as an Accredited Mediation Advocate.

In her employment practice she has a particular interest in the education sector and has acted in employment cases concerning staff at nurseries, schools and universities (see also Katherine’s Education Law profile).

  • Articles
    • The Equality Act 2010 (Amendment) Regulations 2023 in force from 1 January 2024

      Katherine Anderson gives an update on the amendments to the Equality Act 2010, in which the purpose of the regulations is to reproduce in domestic law certain interpretive effects of retained EU law which, under the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023, would otherwise cease to apply in the UK after the end of 2023.

      View Article
    • How pro-active should an employer be in making enquiries of a job applicant who indicates that they are disabled?

      Katherine Anderson analyses AECOM Limited v Mallon [2023] EAT 104, a case in which the EAT provides a useful review of the authorities on what reasonable enquiries an employer should make of a disabled job applicant.

      View Article
    • A Tribunal's duty to seek clarification of what a claim intended

      Katherine Anderson considers the case of Mrs N Moustache v Chelsea and Westminster NHS Foundation Trust: [2022] EAT 204 in which the ET failed to adjudicate upon a claim though its particulars set out sufficient information for it to be considered.

      View Article
    • Protection from detriment of employees warning of potentially harmful health and safety circumstances

      Katherine Anderson considers the case of Miles v Driver and Vehicles Standards Agency [2023] EAT 62 in which the EAT confirmed the scope of the word "at" in the wording "at a place where" of section 44 (1)(c)(i) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

      View Article
    • The importance of correctly identifying the relevant provision, criterion or practice (‘PCP’) and pool for comparison, in any indirect discrimination claims

      Katherine Anderson analyses Royal Parks Ltd v Boohene, Antwi and Others [2023] EAT 63, a case which asked whether workers employed by third-party contractors could rely on the principal's own employees as comparators in a claim of indirect race discrimination relating to rates of pay, under section 41 EqA.

      View Article
    • Case Management Order unintentionally struck out claim

      Katherine Anderson reviews Mendy v Motorola Solutions UK Ltd and Others [2022] EAT 47, a case in which we are reminded that failure to adequately particuliarise a claim does not mean that it is not being pursued.

      View Article
    • EAT confirms a claim cannot be brought for a quantum meruit under the unlawful deductions from wages jurisdiction...

      ...but an employee may have a good claim in the ordinary courts. Katherine Anderson reviews Abellio East Midlands Ltd v Mr K Thomas [2022] EAT 20, a case in which an employee started a new role for their employer before details of the new salary had been agreed.

      View Article
    • Two differently constituted tribunals reached different conclusions on the same compulsory retirement policy – but neither made an error of law

      Katherine Anderson analyses The Chancellor, Masters and Scholars of The University of Oxford v Professor Paul Ewart EA-2020-000128-RN, which highlights that proportionality assessment means it is possible for different ETs to reach different conclusions when considering the same measure adopted by the same employer in respect of the same aims.

      View Article
    • Reasonable adjustments claims: PCPs are not designed to be ‘traps for the unwary’

      Katherine Anderson considers Mrs A Martin v City and County of Swansea: EA-2020-000460-AT (Previously UKEAT/0253/20/AT), a case which confirms the importance of properly identifying PCPs in reasonable adjustments claims, whilst deterring respondents’ lawyers from taking overly technical points on pleading.

      View Article
    • Is mere suspicion of guilt enough to dismiss a teacher because of safeguarding concerns?

      Katherine Anderson analyses the Court of Session's decision in L v K [2021] CSIH 35, a case involving a scenario which practitioners may have encountered before among employers concerned with the safeguarding of children.

      View Article
    • Was a claimant prevented from pursuing a personal injury claim in the civil courts for abuse of the court process?

      Katherine Anderson examines Farnham-Oliver v RM Educational Resources Ltd [2021] EWHC 2418 (QB), the latest in a line of claims where an employee whose claim is compromised in the ET, finds it is then struck out in civil proceedings for abuse of the court’s process.

      View Article
    • Can a claimant who has not paid her taxes succeed in a claim for wrongful or unfair dismissal?

      Katherine Anderson analyses Robinson v His Highness Sheikh Khalid Bin Saqr Al-Qasimi [2021] EWCA Civ 862, a case which highlights the key principles to be applied where an employer raises a defence of illegality, a potential defence which is often considered by employers in disputes over employee status where tax and national insurance have not been paid on the basis that the claimant was an employee.

      View Article
    • What is “conduct extending over a period” and how and when should that question be determined?

      L v 1) X 2) Z & 3) E UKEAT/0080/20/RN

      Employment law barrister Katherine Anderson reviews L v 1) X 2) Z & 3) E UKEAT/0080/20/RN and examines the principles considered by the EAT in determining whether there was “conduct extending over a period” for the purposes of section 123 of the Equality Act 2010.

      View Article
    • Can a Tribunal use the “but for” test to decide whether a claimant was treated unfavourably because of something arising in consequence of their disability?

      Employment law barrister, Katherine Anderson analyses the case of Robinson v Department for Work and Pensions [2020] EWCA Civ 859 (7th July 2020).

      View Article
    • Attending a court to give evidence for the employer is not ‘‘work’’ for the purposes of the ‘furlough’ scheme

      3PB's employment law barrister Katherine Anderson reviews the case of Fottles v Bourne Leisure.

      View Article
    • Disability discrimination claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments? – Rakova v London West Healthcare NHS Trust UKEAT/0043/19/LA

      Rakova v London North West Healthcare NHS Trust UKEAT/0043/19/LA

      Employees can often complain where they feel that their managers are not giving them the tools they need to do their jobs efficiently, effectively or productively. How does that situation relate to a disability discrimination claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments? This decision provides some guidance on the approach to be taken by the Tribunals in claims of disability discrimination by reason of a failure to make reasonable adjustments.

      View Article
    • Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme – how does it fit with the existing law on lay-offs and short-time working?

      Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme – how does it fit with the existing law on lay-offs and short-time working?

      View Article
    • Long term disability benefits: it all depends on the contract

      Long term disability benefits: it all depends on the contract. Katherine Anderson on ICTS (UK) Limited v VISRAM [2020] EWCA Civ 202

      View Article
    • Reasonable adjustments – Is it relevant that the employee didn’t mention them?

      Reasonable adjustments – Is it relevant that the employee didn’t mention them? Katherine Anderson analyses Shah v TIAA Ltd UKEAT/0180/19/BA, following her successful representation of the respondent employer in this appeal before the EAT.

      View Article
    • Legal advice privilege

      Legal advice privilege: Katherine Anderson analyses Curless v Shell International Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 1710

      View Article
    • The implications of Peninsula Business Service Ltd v Baker UKEAT/0241/16/RN on employer liability for acts of victimisation

      3PB Employment Barrister Katherine Anderson examines the implications of Peninsula v Baker on employer liability for acts of victimisation. Katherine Anderson examines if an employer can escape "scot-free" from liability for an act of victimisation if it is 'astute enough' to instruct an innocent third party – or employee - to carry it out.

      View Article
  • Recommendations

    Katherine Anderson is a strong advocate who enjoys a varied caseload which covers employment and education law. She is active in discrimination claims and EAT appeals.
    Strengths: “Katherine was very helpful. I would recommend Katherine to colleagues.”
    “Katherine is a very skilled advocate with substantial legal analytical skills.”
    “Katherine's very responsive; she provided particularly useful written submissions, and gave helpful advice in relation to strategy.”

    Chambers UK 2024/Employment/Western Bar

    Strengths: “She is diligent and has great attention to detail.”
    “She is technically excellent and a great advocate.”

    Chambers UK 2023/Employment/Western Bar

    Strengths: "She has excellent attention to detail on difficult cases and responds extremely promptly." "She is diligent and has very great attention to detail. We consider her a very technically adept lawyer, who can really drive down into conflicting case law."

    Chambers UK 2022/Employment/Western Bar

    Strengths: "She is extremely thorough and detailed in her preparation and advice. She is meticulous in her attention to detail and excellent for complex cases."

    Chambers UK 2021/Employment/Western Bar

    ‘Katherine is forensic in her approach. She looks at all angles and considers all options. A very diligent advocate. ’

    Legal 500 2024/Education/Leading Junior/London Bar

    ‘Katherine is extremely bright, client-friendly and meticulous in her preparation and written work. ’

    Legal 500 2023/Education/Leading Junior/London Bar

    ‘Katherine has a wealth of experience in SEND appeals and is very thorough in her approach; she is a robust advocate and her preparation is always meticulous.’

    Legal 500 2022/Education/Leading Junior/London Bar

    ‘Highly intelligent, thorough in her work and is a tenacious barrister.’

    Legal 500 2021/Education/Leading Individual/London Bar

  • Expand recommendations
View Full CV