Barristers

Ashley Lord


Called: 2015

Summary

Ashley joined Chambers in September 2018.

Before coming to the Bar Ashley worked for one of the Commonwealth’s largest employment law consultancy organisations where he gained extensive advocacy experience and successfully conducted complex multi-week hearings involving complex disputes of fact and law.

Ashley is adept at picking cases up at short notice and is able to digest large amounts of information quickly before delivering effective performances at trial thereafter. He is no stranger to cross examination and is able to assess when a robust approach is necessary or where a more conservative approach will be more successful.

Endorsements

“I have been extremely happy with the way Mr Lord has dealt with the representation of my attendances at court. He has been thorough and prepared even when presented with documentation at short notice. He is pleasant in his manner and is a credit to his profession. I would have no hesitation in recommending his services to anyone if asked to do so”.
A lay client, August 2018.

“Mr Lord… was courteous and professional throughout the proceedings”
When faced with “unjustified hostility” from the Claimant, Mr Lord responded with “considerable patience and courtesy”
Employment Judge Eccles in judgment, October 2017.

Public Law Children

Ashley is part of the Chambers Public Law Children team. Ashley represents Local Authorities, parents and children in all forms of public law children work. Ashley has particular experience in cases involving domestic abuse (including violence) and also substance misuse. Ashley has a growing practice in cases involving allegations of NAI and is keen to maintain this growth.

Throughout his pupillage Ashley appeared in the High Court in various matters including cases that involve children with degenerative conditions that result in highly complex needs.

Cases of Note (most recent first)

LCC v M, R, R, C and others
27-day finding of fact hearing being led by Amanda Ginsburg. Represented the Paternal Grandmother who faced allegations of causing NAI to her 11-week-old granddaughter. The child was found with suspicious bruising and upon completion of skeletal surverys was found to have 3 fractured ribs. This case also involved a high level of inter familial conflict between the maternal and paternal families.
NLC v L and K
15-day composite final hearing being led by Jonathan Wilson. Represented the mother who faced allegations of causing NAI to two of her children. Mother had faced serious hardship in her home country and was recognised as a refugee. As a result of the serious hardship experienced in her home country mother suffered from various mental health conditions. Following the conclusion of the medical evidence the LA confirmed that it was no longer pursuing the allegations of NAI and relied only on mental health concerns for the purposes of threshold. This hearing concluded on interim orders only with a further final hearing to take place following the commencement of therapy.

SCC v A and M
5-day final hearing representing the respondent mother who faced allegations of having allowed her severely autistic child to watch horror films over a period of 18 months. Mother was also alleged to have allowed her second child to become highly obese through a failure to manage eating patterns.

Private Law Children

Ashley is part of the Chambers Private Law Children team. Ashley represents all parties to private law proceedings. Ashley has particular experience in cases involving allegations of:
- adult’s coaching children;
- allegations of domestic abuse (including violence);
- allegations of sexual abuse (of adults and children).

Ashley also has particular experience in handling non-molestation applications.
Ashley also has experience of cases involving alleged Honour Based Violence and appeared in the Royal Courts of Justice before Mr Justice Keehan on behalf of a local authority client intervening in private law proceedings where he successfully secured his clients discharge from proceedings following a dispute as to which local authority was the appropriate authority to be involved.
Cases of Note (most recent first)

K v G
Ashley represented the respondent mother who alleged serious domestic abuse (including violence) from her former partner. The allegations included allegations extending to periods where the mother was pregnant with the child. Successfully secured all findings sought and an order that no contact was to take place with the child until the former partner had completed a domestic violence perpetrators course.

K v M and A Local Authority
Ashley represented the intervening local authority, in private law proceedings involving allegations of domestic abuse and a risk of honour-based violence. This case was transferred to Mr Justice Keehan sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice where Ashley successfully secured a direction that his local authority client be discharged from proceedings. Ashley successfully argued that his client had been incorrectly designated in light of the children’s ordinary residence being out-with its boundaries.

N v R and NR
Ashley represented the applicant mother in her application for a child arrangements order (“live with”). Early in proceedings the respondent father raised serious allegations of sexual abuse by the mother (and latterly her new partner) against the child. The allegations were said to have been made by the child. The child was interviewed by the police and subjected to a child protection medical. The mother sought a counter finding that the father had been coaching the child to make allegations in order to weaken her application. Shortly before the composite final hearing the applicant father withdrew the allegations of abuse. The mother pursued her allegation. Ashley secured a finding that the father had coached the child to make allegations of sexual abuse. Ashley further secured a change of residence from the father to the mother. A contact order providing for supervised contact only pending the completion of work by the father was made.

Employment

Ashley has extensive experience representing Respondents in employment tribunals across England, Wales and Scotland. He has represented businesses of varying size and industry in a wide range of matters. His experience varies from appearing at short preliminary hearings to successful conduct of lengthy and complex multi-week composite hearings.
Ashley is particularly experienced in all aspects of:
Unfair Dismissal
Constructive Unfair Dismissal
Discrimination (all variations)
Harassment
Victimisation
Wages
Breach of Contract
Holiday Pay
Public Interest Disclosure
Employment Status

Ashley has extensive experience of drafting responses in both simple and complex cases. He is available to provide written advice and/or representation at hearings or judicial mediation.

Cases of Note (most recent first)

M v A (L) Limited
3-day liability hearing appearing for the Respondent.
The Claimant was employed as a staff manager at one of the Respondent’s bus depots. The Claimant alleged that he had been discriminated against and harassed on the grounds of his religion. The Claimant was a Muslim. The Claimant alleged that abusive and discriminatory comments were made to him by way of electronic communications and further that he was pressured into attending work social events where the alcohol was consumed – the Claimant asserted that he did not drink alcohol due to his religion. Finally, the Claimant brought a complaint of Breach of Contract.

Following the conclusion of the evidence the tribunal unanimously rejected the Claimant’s claims and found the following as fact:

The Claimant relied heavily on evidence contained on his work mobile phone which the Claimant himself had restored to factory settings upon termination of his employment and prior to bringing his claim;

That the alleged abusive comments had not been made;

That the Claimant had not been pressured into attending work social events; and,

That the Claimant in fact did drink alcohol.

F v A (L) Limited
5-day liability hearing appearing for the Respondent in respect of allegations dating back to 2014.
The Claimant was employed as a bus driver in London. The Claimant alleged that he was discriminated against on the grounds of race, disability, sex and religion. The Claimant further alleged harassment, victimisation and a failure to make reasonable adjustments. Having filed his claim with the employment tribunal in April 2014 the Claimant was involved in a road traffic collision whilst on duty with a London Taxi. The Claimant was ultimately dismissed for conduct reasons following an investigation into this collision. The Claimant was successful in amending his claim to include a complaint of unfair dismissal.

This case further involved arguments as to limitation in respect of elements of the discrimination complaints and following the decision of the EAT in Galille v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2018] ICR 634, the unfair dismissal complaint too.

All claims were dismissed, and the court accepted the Respondent’s limitation arguments confirming that all claims were time-barred.

W v WASS
12-day liability hearing acting for the Respondent.
Successful defence of complaints of constructive unfair dismissal, a failure to make reasonable adjustments and direct disability discrimination. The Claimant had raised 53 individual allegations.

The Claimant was found to be a disabled person under the Equality Act 2010. The tribunal accepted the Respondent’s case, however, that it did not have knowledge of the disability, nor did it have knowledge of the alleged substantial disadvantage.
The complaints raised by the Claimant dated back to 2014/2015 with the factual allegations within those complaints spanning close to 18 months. This case also involved sensitive issues of attempted suicide and allegations of sexual and financial abuse of a vulnerable person.

M v GCIL
9-day final hearing acting for the Respondent.

Successful defence of complaints of unfair dismissal and of disability discrimination.
The Respondent accepted that the Claimant was a disabled person within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010, but the tribunal accepted that the Respondent did not have knowledge of either the disability or of the alleged substantial disadvantage.

The tribunal found that the Claimant was dismissed for reasons of gross misconduct and that the Respondent had reasonably believed, on the evidence obtained during its investigations, that the Claimant had conspired with a service user for whom he provided support, to de-fraud the Independent Living Fund.

Court of Protection

Ashley has experience in court of protection work.

Cases of Note

BMDC v KB and LH
Ashley appeared in this long-running case before Mr Justice Cobb for determination of LH’s application for contact at KB’s placement. The court agreed with the LA and Litigation Friend that it was not in KB’s best interests for contact to take place at the placement and further agreed that contact should take place away from the placement.

Prison Law

Ashley is part of the Chambers Prison Law team and has experience appearing before the Parole Board on behalf of prisoners seeking release.

Cases of Note

Re: CJ
Ashley appeared before the Parole Board on behalf of a prisoner serving a life sentence for murder. The prisoner had been directed to serve a minimum term of 13 years before being eligible for parole. Following transfer to open conditions in 2015 she absconded but was later apprehended and returned to closed conditions with an additional sentence for having absconded. Ashley successfully secured her release on life licence at her parole hearing.

Interests

Away from court Ashley is an avid football supporter and can be often found in the stands at Old Trafford (for his sins). Ashley is also a keen cook, traveller and enjoys many outdoor activities.

Professional Memberships

North Eastern Circuit
Inner Temple
Lawyers for Children
Employment Law Bar Association