Barristers

Jane Callan

Specialisms:

Employment

Jane practises exclusively in employment and discrimination law. She has particular expertise in equal pay and discrimination cases. Jane is instructed to represent claimants (including Trade Union backed claimants) and counts local authorities, health authorities and “blue chip” companies amongst her respondent clients. She has been instructed in a number of high profile equal pay and discrimination cases (see below). She is the head of the employment group at Trinity Chambers.

Administrative & Public Law

Jane appeared for the North East Group of solicitors, intervenors in the high profile case of The Law Society v Legal Services Commission [2010] EWHC 2550 (Admin), an application for judicial review of the 2010 competitive tendering process for the provision of publicly funded family law services conducted by the LSC. The Administrative Court held that the tendering process was irrational, unfair and arbitrary due to the failure to indicate clearly, in advance, the criteria to be met to win contracts.

Jane has also advised in cases involving schools admissions and closure of local authority residential homes.

Cases:

South Tyneside Council v Ward [2011] UKEAT/358/10, LTL 17/08/11 - a case involving the correct test to apply to evaluating a dismissal by notice where it was held by the EAT that events between the giving of notice and its expiry may affect the overall question of fairness, such that that issue should not be decided solely on the facts as at the date notice was given.

The Law Society v Legal Services Commission [2010] EWHC 2550 (Admin) - application for judicial review of the 2010 LSC competitive tendering process for the provision of publicly funded family law services.

Newcastle City Council v Marsden [2010] ICR 743, UKEAT - appeared for the claimant. Key issue was the scope of paragraph 34(3)(e) of the Employment Tribunals' rules. The case was heard by Underhill J, President of the EAT.

Northumberland County Council v Railton [2009] UKEAT LTL 28/08/09 – appeared for the claimant in a race discrimination case. The issue was what evidential material could be relied upon by an employment tribunal to make a finding of direct race discrimination.

Hartlepool Borough Council and others v Llewellyn and others [2009] IRLR 796, UKEAT (combined case) – appeared for Middlesbrough BC. Case involved the ability of males to bring contingent “piggyback” equal pay claims using successful females as comparators.

Surtees v Middlesbrough Borough Council [2008] UKEAT/0282/08 - appeared for Middlesbrough BC in a case concerning disclosure of privileged material.

Redcar and Cleveland Council and others v Bainbridge and others, [2008] IRLR 776 EWCA – (combined case) appeared for Middlesbrough BC. Issues included protection and separate collective bargaining genuine material factor defences in long-running equal pay litigation affecting local government.

Middlesbrough Borough Council v Surtees (No. 2) [2007] IRLR 981, UKEAT – appeared for Middlesbrough BC. Issue was the ability of an Employment Tribunal to allow a party to adduce an expert’s report in equal value proceedings.

Middlesbrough Borough Council v Surtees [2007] IRLR 869, UKEAT – appeared for Middlesbrough BC. Issues as above in combined case of Bainbridge.

Tyne and Wear Passenger Transport Executive (trading as Nexus) v. Best and others [2007] ICR 523, UKEAT – appeared for a claimant claiming equal pay to male metro train drivers. Key issue was the evaluation of disparate impact in order to establish the need for the employer to show objective justification for the pay difference.

Middlesbrough Borough Council v Morgan [2005] EWCA Civ 1432 – appeared for Middlesbrough BC in equal pay case involving school based staff. Key issue was whether the EAT had erred in finding that an employment tribunal had insufficient material upon which to reach a conclusion that a claimant had failed to establish that a male was a comparable employee for the purposes of the evaluating like work under the Equal Pay Act 1970.

Vento v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [2003] IRLR 102 . EWCA – appeared for claimant. Case established the Vento guidelines in assessing injury to feelings in discrimination cases.

Chief Constable of West Yorkshire v Vento [2001] IRLR 124, UKEAT – appeared for claimant. Issue was the evidential material which could be used to construct a valid hypothetical comparator in a sex discrimination case.

What others say:

"highly experienced and good on her feet." She acts for a mixed bag of respondents and claimants, and has a focus on discrimination and equal pay cases." Chambers & Partners 2012

"technically superb and has an excellent grasp of the detail" Chambers & Partners 2011

"Jane Callan is an experienced employment junior specialising in discrimination and TUPE matters " Legal 500 2010

"Jane Callan of Trinity Chambers has cultivated a reputation as an "employment star" having trained for the Bar after ten years working as an employment law adviser in a national employers' organisation. She impresses clients with her authoritative approach, proving successful in TUPE, discrimination and equal pay cases"
Chambers & Partners 2010

"Jane Callan specializes in discrimination and TUPE"
Legal 500 2009

"Class act Jane Callan impresses clients with her “versatility and attention to detail"
Chambers & Partners 2009

"Sources appreciate the 'professional and cosy bedside manner' of the 'user friendly' Jane Callan. The contentious side of her practice includes disability, sex discrimination and equal pay issues, whilst she has also offered advice to large local authorities on restructuring plans"
Chambers & Partners 2008

"...Is an employment star..."
Legal 500 2007