Imogen Egan

Imogen is committed to her employment law practice. She acts for both claimants and respondents and regularly deals with multi-day claims against more senior counsel.

Examples of Imogen’s recent cases include:

• E v ISS, successfully representing a respondent in an unfair dismissal claim related to redundancies where it was alleged that the pool of employees had been drawn incorrectly.
• D v PAAT White Cloud, successfully representing a respondent at a multi-day hearing of a complex constructive dismissal claim against the backdrop of an acrimonious shareholder dispute. Imogen persuaded the Tribunal that there had been no repudiatory breach of contract.
• Advice and drafting for a long-serving NHS professional who has been denied redundancy pay on the premise that she was offered “suitable alternative work”.
• P v GWR, successfully representing a respondent in a multi-day hearing of a sexual orientation discrimination claim based upon a series of alleged detriments. All claims were dismissed.
• K and others v Eostre Education, acting for five claimants who had been made redundant and not received their redundancy pay. The Respondent retrospectively alleged that there had been a TUPE transfer but this was rejected by the Tribunal. All of Imogen’s clients were awarded their redundancy pay and owed notice pay (total judgment against the Respondent was in excess of £50,000).
• M v Elysium Health Care, advancing a successful application on behalf of a respondent at a Preliminary Issue Hearing that a claim for constructive unfair dismissal had been made prematurely because it was received before the Respondent received the Claimant’s resignation.
• S v ISS, successfully representing a respondent in a claim for a failure to grant rest breaks/compensatory rest to the Claimant. The Tribunal agreed with Imogen’s submission that as the Claimant admitted he did have rest breaks in the last few months of his employment the claim was out of time and the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it.
• Instructed for a claimant who brings claims of whistleblowing detriment and constructive unfair dismissal against a well-known religious charitable organisation.

Through the Bar Pro Bono Unit, FRU, and ELAAS, Imogen has represented Applicants at the EAT in Rule 3(10) and Appeal hearings, dealing with complex questions of perceived bias (Kidd v Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis UKEAT/0191/17/RN) and the procedure to be followed by a tribunal where no response to an employer’s contract claim has been received (Limoine v Sharma UKEAT/0094/19/RN).

She also assisted Naomi Ling in the EAT hearing of Crawford v Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd UKEAT/0316/16 (overturned by the Court of Appeal: [2019] EWCA Civ 269, CA).

“Fantastic well done Imogen. I will definitely use her again. Happy to give her a quote for any Bio, I was very impressed.” (Solicitor)