Two women spoke out against Judge Philip Lancaster: one claimed he had yelled at her at least sixteen times, and the other stated she feared for any woman appearing before him.
His “degrading behaviour” was something the ladies who had different encounters with him wished to draw attention to.
Despite some women’s complete or partial success on appeal, every single one of the women spoken to by the BBC lost their cases hearing in Leeds before Judge Lancaster.
Disputes between employers and employees are resolved by employment tribunals, which are specialised courts. Unfair dismissal, discrimination, and redundancy payouts are at the heart of about 30,000 hearings that take place annually in England, Scotland, and Wales. A different system is in place in Northern Ireland.
As part of her case against her ex-business partner for maternity discrimination, general practitioner Dr. Hinaa Toheed appeared before employment tribunal Judge Lancaster in February 2022.
According to her, the judge referred to her case as an “omnishambles” on the initial morning of her hearing.
According to Dr. Toheed, the judge attempted to coerce her into making admissions that bolstered the opposing side’s case the moment she began to testify, taking over cross-examination from the lawyer representing her former partner.
“If I didn’t agree with anything that he said, he would shout at me,” she pointed out.
Concerns about Judge Lancaster’s hostile and intimidating behaviour towards Dr. Toheed were voiced by her legal team at the conclusion of the first day.
They kept track of the sixteen times he yelled at Dr. Toheed during her testimony, spread out across three days.
A request for the judge to step out from the case was discussed by Dr Toheed’s attorneys, but they ultimately decided against it because they knew it would likely backfire and further antagonise him.
Despite losing her case, she plans to appeal the tribunal’s decision.
Dr. Toheed took Judge Lancaster’s “inappropriately hostile attitude” towards her to the Courts and Tribunal Judiciary as grounds for her complaint.
In 2022, a higher-ranking judge named Stuart Robertson reviewed her complaint; however, his ruling is currently “in abeyance” [on hold] pending the outcome of Dr. Toheed’s appeal.
Judge Robertson justified his decision on the grounds that her complaint covered similar points to her appeal and he wished to “avoid possible embarrassment” to the employment tribunal process.
“It seems like the bigger concern is how this looks for the judiciary, than actually dealing with Judge Lancaster’s conduct,” says Dr Toheed.
Nine months earlier, a woman called Andra had appeared before Judge Lancaster to represent her partner, Ion Ionel, a joiner from Romania. He had brought a case of racial discrimination against the construction company he worked for.
Andra, a Romanian national, claimed to have studied hard for the hearing despite her lack of legal training.
She recounts how Judge Lancaster was visibly agitated and angry right from the beginning of the hearing, yelling at her and her colleague on more than one occasion.
“I don’t think I’ve ever been treated like that in my life,” she says.
“He literally interrupted me whenever I was asking any questions, saying it’s either irrelevant, or I shouldn’t ask this today, I should put it to another witness, not this witness. And then when we got to the other witness, he would say: ‘Why didn’t you ask the other witness yesterday?’”
Mr Ionel lost his case but successfully appealed against the ruling.
An appeal tribunal said that there had been “serious material procedural irregularities” during the hearing, including “a significant number of occasions when the judge intervened to prevent questioning of the respondent’s witnesses”.
In September, a fresh hearing will take place, this time before a different judge. Judge Lancaster continues to be the target of Andra’s demands for redress because according to her, “what he put us through was horrible, really horrible.”
In England and Wales, audio recordings of employment tribunal proceedings have been standard practice since November 2023.
However, throughout the period these cases were being heard (from 2018 to 2022), the written notes of the judge were considered the official record of the employment tribunal sessions.
The ladies claim that it is difficult to get allegations against judges upheld due to the lack of independent proof.
Claimants continue to have to have a court official present when they visit court premises in order to access the recordings. However, one case heard by Judge Lancaster received publicity in the press. An HR specialist named Alison McDermott filed a high-profile lawsuit against the Cumbrian nuclear waste disposal and reprocessing firm Sellafield in 2021.
News reports referred to criticisms she made of Judge Lancaster. According to McDermott, he became angry and made “sneering” remarks about her salary.
“I think it mattered hugely that I was a woman,” according to her. “For some reason, he had a real problem with the fact that I was a well-paid professional woman.”
Ms McDermott lost her case, although an appeal judge found there had been errors in her tribunal and she won some minor concessions. A separate hearing is deciding if she is liable for costs.
Many were outspoken in their criticism of the employment tribunal system and Judge Lancaster after hearing her account.
Two other ladies who approached Ms. McDermott following her case and had also lodged complaints against the judge were interviewed by BBC News:
A nurse, who brought a case against an NHS trust in 2021 claims he showed “extreme bias” towards her employer’s witnesses, and says he bullied her and “raised his voice angrily” – she lost the case but was partially successful on appeal.
In 2018, a lady who had a case heard by Judge Lancaster claims that he exhibited “erratic, illogical, aggressive” and “profoundly disturbing” attitude.
“On the one hand, it’s affirming,” remarks Ms. McDermott. “On the other hand, it’s really upsetting to hear that more women have been abused.”
When reached by the BBC, Judge Lancaster—who has presided over employment tribunals since 2007—refused to comment.
Leave a Reply