HomeAbout UsBusinessPersonalNews & ArticlesContactReceived a debt collection letter?Download our 'Income and Expenditure' form here

‘Celebrity’ claims raise important legal issues

Posted
October 7, 2013
Employment Law

It is fair to say that few Employment Tribunal cases find themselves so widely commented on as those that benefit from a sprinkling of celebrity stardust.  This week, we find ourselves spoilt for choice, as two such cases come along at the same time. The runners and riders When the ‘colourful’ horseracing pundit John McCririck was given his marching orders by Channel 4 last October, it was perhaps predictable that sparks would fly.  After all, he has never had a problem with speaking his mind.  However even Channel 4 might have been slightly taken aback when he declared his intention to pursue claims against them for age discrimination, seeking £3m in compensation.  Often these sorts of figure are bandied around more to make headline than anything else; it would be exceptionally unusual for an award of anything like this amount of money to be made.  But with the case going before the Employment Tribunal this week, it will be interesting to see what a Judge makes of it all. It is worth remembering that Mr McCririck follows in the footsteps of Miriam O’Reilly.  

You may recall that she is the former Countryfile presenter, who successfully sued the BBC for age discrimination only a few years ago.  The central thrust of the allegations put forward by Mr McCririck – that he was sidelined in order to make way for a younger replacement – is the same as that advanced by Ms O’Reilly. Looking - admittedly rather superficially - at the basic facts, what appears to be true is that Mr McCririck has been replaced by someone younger.  As a result, the burden of proof may fall on Channel 4 to show that the reason for dispensing with his services was in no way whatsoever related to his age.  Practically speaking, proving a negative can often be very difficult.  Furthermore, the truth of the matter may be that whenever television producers are seeking to ‘shake up’ a programme’s format, there will be an in-built presumption that the mantel passes to a new and younger generation of presenters.  

The problem is that such a presumption is likely to be inherently age discriminatory. Unsurprisingly Channel 4 denies all allegations of age discrimination and says that it will be “vigorously defending” Mr McCririck’s claims. “You’re fired” Back in May of this year, we heard about the unsuccessful Employment Tribunal claim brought by former ‘The Apprentice’ contestant Stella English against one of Lord Sugar’s companies.  The case failed fairly spectacularly, with the Employment Judge suggesting it should never have been brought in the first place.  These comments no doubt encouraged Lord Sugar and his lawyers to believe that this might be one of those rare occasions when an Employment Tribunal would be prepared to order the employee to pay the employer’s legal costs. Lord Sugar was very vocal in his views about the so-called ‘claims culture’.  At the time, it certainly seemed like he had struck a blow for the employer; he refused to back down or just settle the case and had successfully defended the claim.  But it would appear that he is now in danger of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.  At an Employment Tribunal hearing that took place in the last few weeks, an application for a costs order against Ms English was refused, leaving Lord Sugar with a legal bill of £50,000. This case is now in danger of re-enforcing the feeling that the odds are stacked in the employee’s favour.  After all, Ms English’s claim failed, she was criticised for bringing it in the first place and yet Lord Sugar still ends up with a hefty legal bill as a result of standing his ground. 

  All are equal before the law It’s worth bearing in mind that despite the familiarity of the names involved in these cases; the laws that apply to them remain the same and those that apply to you and me.  Lord Sugar has already learnt that to his cost.  Time will tell whether Mr McCririck fares any better.

Share this article

Have you read our other blogs?

New ‘flexible working’ Code of Practice on its way

Posted
March 4, 2024
Employment Law
Read More

Watch out for April’s rate changes

Posted
March 4, 2024
Employment Law
Read More
View all Articles

Stay up to date with stevensdrake

Simply fill out your details below to receive stevensdrake's monthly newsletter, including regular topical articles, tips and upcoming events.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.