Employment and Equalities
Craig is a highly experienced employment law specialist who acts for both Claimants and Respondents at all stages of cases in the Employment Tribunal, Employment Appeal Tribunal, County Court, and High Court.
He is regularly asked: to advise at all stages of litigation; to draft ET3s, Grounds of Resistance, Case Management Agendas, Schedules of Issues, and Skeleton Arguments; to conduct preliminary hearings; and to conduct numerous full merits hearings which might range from short unlawful deduction from earnings claims to complicated multi-day whistleblowing, unfair dismissal and discrimination claims. He also frequently deals with cases involving restrictive covenants.
He regularly lectures to solicitors and their lay / business clients on how to deal with drafting employment contracts, misconduct / grievance procedures and dismissals, issues involving TUPE, redundancy situations, and case law updates.
Before coming to the Bar, Craig worked at one of the ‘Big Four’ financial services firms and therefore has an excellent level of commercial understanding of how employment relationships work in day to day practice from both an employee and employer perspective.
Craig has been appointed to the panel of barristers of the Employment Lawyers Appeals Advice Scheme (‘ELAAS’). ELAAS is a service offering pro bono employment law advice to appellants and respondents where there is a preliminary hearing in the Employment Appeal Tribunal with no previous legal representation on record.
He is a member of the Employment Law Bar Association and is direct access qualified.
A brief overview of his trial experience in the recent past is set out below:
Omar v Tower Transit Operations Ltd
5 day trial involving claims for direct race discrimination, religious discrimination, and unfair dismissal. The judgment in the case records variously that: “We agree with Mr Ludlow for the Respondent that where the Claimant disputes the contents of the notes of meetings he does so selectively when it suits him or his case to do so…”; “We think there is some force in the suggestion put to the Claimant by Mr Ludlow that he was “making it up as he went along”…”; “Mr Ludlow correctly points out that the Claimant made no reference in this considered occurrence report (which the Claimant headed “Horrific Occurrence”) of (i) spitting; (ii) racial abuse; (iii) discrimination on grounds of race or religion; (iv) being accused of praying by Mr Asew or (v) any allegation that his Somali national origins or Muslim religion were relevant”; and “We think Mr Ludlow’s observations on behalf of the Respondent as to the Claimant’s credibility are well made”.
Styles v London United Busways Ltd
7 day trial involving numerous and wide ranging historical complaints of direct sex discrimination and harassment, as well as claims for unfair dismissal claim, race discrimination, direct disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments, indirect discrimination on grounds of disability, and discrimination arising from disability.
Chasha v Swarthmore Housing Society Ltd
9 day trial involving claims of direct race discrimination and unfair dismissal.
Patel v East London Bus & Coach Company Ltd
4 day trial involving claims for direct race discrimination and unfair dismissal.
Anwar v Sir George Monoux College
8 day trial involving claims of direct race discrimination, indirect race discrimination, and unfair dismissal.
Llewellyn-Jones v Cyient Europe Ltd
3 day trial involving a claim for constructive unfair dismissal.
Denton v Renewable Energy Systems Ltd
3 day trial involving a claim for unfair dismissal.
Saych v Suffolk New College
2 day trial involving a claim for unfair dismissal
Field v Bournemouth Transport Ltd
2-day trail involving claims for unfair dismissal, age discrimination, and disability discrimination.
Osei-Agyeman v East London Bus & Coach Company Ltd
3 day trial involving claims for direct race discrimination and unfair dismissal, in which the unsuccessful claimant was ordered to pay £7,500 towards the Respondent’s costs on the basis that the complaints were misconceived and it was unreasonable for him to have continued to pursue his claims.
Miah v Docklands Buses Ltd
2-day trial involving claims of unfair dismissal, trade union discrimination, unlawful deduction from wages, and breaches of the Working Time Regulations in respect of holidays.
Taylor v (1) Endeavour Insurance Services (2) CGNMB LLP
3 day preliminary hearing involving TUPE issues and claims for direct sex discrimination and unfair dismissal.
Persad v Beneden Hospital Trust
6 day trial involving claims of direct sex discrimination and unfair dismissal.
Swaine v University Buses Ltd
2 preliminary hearings culminating in the striking out of the claimant’s claims for unfair dismissal and disability discrimination.
Mendes de Campos v Docklands Buses Ltd
2 day trial involving claims for direct race discrimination, unpaid wages, and unfair dismissal.
Hamdoun v London General Transport Services Ltd
5 day trial involving claims for direct race discrimination and unfair dismissal.
In the immediate future Mr Ludlow is instructed to conduct the following cases for the Respondent bus companies:
Anonymous v East London Bus & Coach Company Ltd
6 day trial involving claims for direct sex discrimination, harassment, and unfair dismissal.
Watson v Tower Transit Operations Ltd
5 day trial – disability discrimination and unfair dismissal claim in which disability remains in issue.
Ali v East London Bus & Coach Company Ltd
3 day trial involving a disability discrimination claim.
What Craig’s solicitors and lay clients say about him:
“A ‘go to’ Barrister who installs confidence in his Instructing Solicitors and clients alike, who consistently drives through evidence to understand the facts, ensures the highest attention to detail and presentation of his case whether written or through highly skilled advocacy. His attention to detail and timely actions never fail to impress.”
"A firm favourite with clients due to his amiable nature and capabilities, Craig consistently delivers. An experienced, meticulous advocate who inspires confidence and gets results."
"Craig consistently delivers…His advocacy is fearless and persuasive."
“From my first meeting with Craig I have enjoyed working with him. He is clever, articulate, prepared to listen and displays excellent judgement, resulting in a calming and down to earth manner with clients. His attention to detail and meticulous preparation and presentation of our case was evident at the Tribunal and he was absolutely formidable in cross-examination”.
“Craig was very detailed in identifying any problem areas in the witness evidence to be presented to the employment tribunal and had a firm grasp of the documentary evidence. He clearly struck a rapport with my client and helped put them at ease. He provided speedy and helpful advice to me both prior to, and during the course of, a lengthy hearing.”
“Craig’s attention to detail and focus during a case makes him a formidable opponent as no stone is left unturned during his cross examination. He is also incisive in his questioning of clients and solicitors before a case begins, producing clear and concise advice.”
“I found Mr Ludlow’s support in preparing for the tribunal to be extremely insightful in anticipating the potential areas for questioning. During the tribunal Mr Ludlow clearly demonstrated his excellent skills in cross examining, being clear to keep focused on the merits of the case and defending the Company’s course of actions taken. His attention to detail and in depth knowledge of relevant employment legislation was evident in the manner in which he delivered the summing up of the case. Mr Ludlow is highly articulate with a high level of intelligence that enables him to quickly present the core issues and excellently defend his client’s case.”