Claire Darwin KC

• Recommendations

  "When the stakes are highest and the law is at its most difficult, Claire is the person you want." - Legal 500 2027 (Employment)

  "One of the standout employment silks at the Bar. She is exceptional: fiercely intelligent, strategically brilliant, and consistently compelling in both written submissions and oral advocacy." - Legal 500 2027 (Employment)

  "She's great with clients but most of all she fights to win, and ultimately she has what clients want: to know they've got the better advocate with the better arguments on their side." - Chambers UK Bar 2027 (Employment)

  "Claire is fiendishly smart and takes great joy in the tricky legal issues and difficult arguments." - Chambers UK Bar 2027 (Employment)

  “Claire’s written and oral advocacy is exemplary. She has the ear of the court.” – Legal 500 2025 (Administrative Law and Human Rights)

  “A very confident advocate who is well respected by the judiciary.” – Legal 500 2024 (Employment)

  “Claire Darwin is extremely impressive, particularly at pursuing those cases that are high-profile and break new ground.” – Chambers UK Bar 2026 (Employment)

  “Claire is very forensic in her cross-examination and her general approach.” – Chambers UK Bar 2026 (Employment)

  “Claire is a powerful advocate and totally committed to whatever case she is instructed in. She is strong and effective in court.” – Legal 500 2026 (Pensions)

  “Claire never misses a trick. She is incredibly knowledgeable and assured.” – Chambers UK Bar 2026 (Pensions)

  “Claire is technically excellent, particularly on complex discrimination issues.” – Legal 500 2026 (Employment)

  “Claire Darwin is a very composed and impressive courtroom advocate. She cuts to the point in a clear, concise way that lands persuasively with the judge.” – Chambers UK Bar 2025 (Education)

  “Claire Darwin displayed excellent advocacy skills. She is very aware of what will be most commercially useful for the client.” – Chambers UK Bar 2026 (Education)

  “Claire is a highly impressive advocate and a class act.” – Legal 500 2025 (Pensions)

Expertise

• Recent Work

  Highlights of Claire's recent work include:

  • Jallali v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (Court of Appeal, pending; below at [2025] EAT 137). Lead counsel for the Home Secretary in an appeal concerning the application of nationally determined terms and conditions to part-time police inspectors.
  • Anne v Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust (Court of Appeal, pending; judgment below at [2026] IRLR 354). Lead counsel for the Trust in a significant appeal on indirect race discrimination and the interpretation of regulation 4(5)(b) of TUPE following the transfer of 80 cleaners.
  • Lead counsel for the Kuwait Investment Authority, the Kuwaiti sovereign wealth fund, in a high-profile appeal before the EAT on whether the Authority is entitled to state immunity in respect of a whistleblowing claim brought by its former chief executive (ongoing).
  • Lead counsel for multiple individual and overseas corporate Respondents in the energy sector, in a complex and high value sex discrimination claim, and linked appeals to the EAT about the international jurisdiction of the Employment Tribunal (ongoing).
  • Lead counsel for a major infrastructure investment firm in an appeal to the EAT, again on the Employment Tribunal's international jurisdiction (ongoing).
  • Lead counsel for a major fintech company in a complex disability discrimination and whistleblowing claim (Employment Tribunal, ongoing).
  • Lead counsel for a leading global investment bank in a very high-value sex and disability discrimination claim brought by a senior employee, which settled on the eve of trial (Employment Tribunal, 2026).
  • Representing an individual Respondent to a complex, high value sex, religion and disability discrimination claim (Employment Tribunal, ongoing).
  • Lead counsel for Merrill Lynch/Bank of America in Stepchuk v Merrill Lynch International, one of the highest-profile discrimination trials of 2025, involving claims of sex and age discrimination brought by a banker dismissed after a relationship with a junior colleague.
  • Counsel for Martine Croxall, Karin Giannone, Kasia Madera and Annita McVeigh in their appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal on whether earlier settlement agreements barred new equal pay claims against the BBC (settled 2025). See coverage of the appeal (PA) and of the settlement in The Guardian and Press Gazette.
  • Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia (Cultural Bureau) v Alhayali [2026] ICR 196 (Court of Appeal). Lead counsel for the Embassy in a significant appeal on the State Immunity Act 1978.
  • Lead counsel in R (United Grand Lodge of England) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2026] EWHC 330 (Admin), the widely publicised challenge brought by Freemasons to the requirement that Metropolitan Police staff and officers disclose their membership.
  • Sullivan v Isle of Wight Council [2025] ICR 1299 (Court of Appeal). Lead counsel for Protect, the UK's whistleblowing charity, on whether whistleblowing protection extends to job applicants.
  • Lead counsel for a senior female executive of a FTSE 250 company in substantial equal pay and sex discrimination claims, which settled for a seven-figure sum shortly before trial (2024).
  • Lead counsel for a leading US brokerage in its successful defence of an £8 million whistleblowing and unfair dismissal claim: after an eight-day trial every whistleblowing claim was dismissed and the compensation for unfair dismissal was reduced to nil (2024).

• Employment

  According to Chambers UK Bar 2026 ‘Claire Darwin KC is a highly experienced employment barrister who has an extensive practice encompassing equal pay, worker status, Industrial Relations and discrimination claims’ and ‘frequently appears before the EAT and appeal courts.’

  Claire regularly acts in very high value City cases, and in sensitive disputes involving financial institutions or professional service firms.  She is trusted by leading employers and employees alike, representing multinational corporates, the UK and foreign governments, regulators, universities, trade unions and individual employees. 

  Claire’s work often concerns the human rights aspects of employment law, including cases about freedom of expression, discrimination, forced labour, workplace privacy, open justice and fair trial rights. 

• Discrimination and Equal Pay

  Claire has handled many high-stakes discrimination cases in the Employment Tribunal, the County Court and the High Court, including a number of group/multi-party claims and test case litigation. The Legal 500 2026 describes her as ‘technically excellent, particularly on complex discrimination issues.’ Her discrimination work spans the fields of employment, goods and services, pensions, premises, education, and public law. According to The Legal 500 2024 ‘on complex disability discrimination cases there is no one better.’ 

  Claire has valuable experience of lengthy and complex multi-party equal pay cases involving thousands of employees in the public and private sectors, including the recent supermarket equal pay litigation. She was sole counsel for the TV presenter Samira Ahmed in her very high-profile equal pay claim against the BBC. 

  Claire was appointed as amicus curiae to the Court of Appeal in Graysons Restaurants Ltd v Jones and others [2019] 3 All ER 688, an appeal concerning the interaction between the law on equal pay and the insolvency protection scheme under the ERA 1996. Recently, she successfully represented a senior female executive of a FTSE 250 company in significant equal pay and discrimination claims, which settled for a seven-figure sum in autumn 2024, shortly before trial.

• Discrimination in Goods and Services and Accessibility

  Claire has wide experience of advising on discrimination in the provision of goods and services across a range of sectors, including technology, transport, aviation, retail, entertainment, and financial services. She is regularly instructed on matters with business-wide implications, including advising on potential or actual enforcement action by the Equality and Human Rights Commission. 

  She has acted in numerous cases concerning the rights of disabled passengers on transport, notably successfully defending Arriva North East against group litigation brought by wheelchair users in Darlington and advising a well-known budget airline facing threatened disability discrimination claims. During the Covid-19 pandemic, Claire advised several of the UK’s largest retailers on alleged disability discrimination said to arise from reduced access to online shopping and the requirement to wear facemasks. 

  Claire has a particular interest in web accessibility and the accessibility of digital products and services. She has advised public-sector bodies on compliance with the Accessibility Regulations and on related standards. She successfully defended a national broadcaster in litigation on the scope of the content service exception in the Equality Act 2010. She is co-author of an article on the European Accessibility Act 2025, written with members of Hogan Lovells’ Digital Accessibility team, which was published in the July 2025 edition of PLC Magazine. 

  Her recent goods and services work includes advising on assistance cats, advising a prominent entertainment sector client on alleged disability discrimination arising from its processes, advising the government on whether BSL interpreters should be permitted to enter jury deliberation rooms as a reasonable adjustment (now permissible following a change to the law), and the potential closure of ticket offices at train stations. She successfully resisted a potential appeal in Johnston v Giving.com Ltd [2024] EWHC 944 (KB).

• International and Cross-Border Employment Work

  Claire has substantial experience of employment disputes with an international dimension. She has acted for a number of foreign states and related entities claiming immunity under the State Immunity Act 1978. Recent instructions include lead counsel for the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia before the Court of Appeal in 2025, and the Kuwait Investment Authority before the EAT in 2026. 

  She has advised on matters of international human rights law arising in other common law jurisdictions. Claire is at the forefront of litigation concerning the international jurisdiction of the Employment Tribunal following the post-Brexit amendments to the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982, and issues arising from the EAT’s judgment in Prahl v Lapinski. 

  Her work in this area includes five separate appeals currently before the Employment Appeal Tribunal. Claire has wide experience of advising on the territorial reach of UK employment legislation. 

  She is a contributing author of Tolley's Employment Handbook (LexisNexis, forthcoming), writing the chapter on Foreign Employees and Employees Working Abroad, and the author of the PLC practice notes on the Territorial scope of British statutory employment rights, TUPE and cross-border transfers  and co-author (with Hogan Lovells’ Digital Accessibility Team) of the PLC note on the European Accessibility Act. Claire sits on the Employment Lawyers Association's International Committee and is a member of the European Employment Lawyers Association (EELA).

• TUPE

  Claire has significant experience of advising on TUPE issues. According to Chambers UK Bar she is “well known for her strength in … claims concerning TUPE.” Claire is regularly instructed in very high value multi-party TUPE litigation, including the high profile and lengthy litigation after Jarvis Rail Ltd went into administration. 

  More recently she successfully defended the litigation arising out of the ‘pre-pack administration’ of Thomson Local, advised on the TUPE transfer of approximately 500 employees in Northern Ireland, and defended the owner of an energy company against claims that a change in ownership, and consequent change in responsibility for the business, had amounted to a TUPE transfer (settled prior to final hearing in ET). 

  In 2025 she was instructed in a complex case concerning whether the sale of a substantial private residence with staff constituted an economic entity capable of transfer under TUPE which settled shortly before hearing. 

  More recently, she has advised on the Regulation 3(5) ‘administrative reorganisation’ exception, and its interaction with Part 2 of the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023. Claire does a great deal of work in the areas of employment law which intersect with EU Law and assimilated law. She has experience of acting in cases in which a reference to the European Court of Justice is sought and was called to the Irish Bar after Brexit.

• Whistleblowing

  Claire has extensive experience handling complex whistleblowing claims, with a particular focus on those arising in the financial services and technology sectors. 

  In November 2021, she successfully defended a leading global financial services group in a three-week trial involving over 300 disputed protected disclosures. In July 2024, Claire secured a significant victory for the Kuwaiti sovereign wealth fund, in a high-profile whistleblowing claim brought by its former CEO. The case, now before the EAT, received significant media attention, see for example here. In November 2024 she successfully defended a leading US brokerage against an £8 million whistleblowing and unfair dismissal claim; following an 8-day trial all whistleblowing claims were dismissed and compensation for unfair dismissal reduced to nil. She represented Protect, the leading whistleblowing charity, in the Court of Appeal in Sullivan v Isle of Wight Council [2025] I.C.R 1299.

• Industrial Relations

  Claire Darwin KC has wide experience of industrial relations matters, including collective bargaining, industrial action and statutory recognition applications before the Central Arbitration Committee, and advises both trade unions and employers on industrial disputes.

   

  She is ranked by Chambers UK Bar as a leading silk in Industrial Relations (All Circuits) in both the 2026 and 2027 editions. Chambers describes her as “a silk who is well known for her industrial relations practice”, notes that she “has experience of notable trade union disputes” and “is also active in the Court of Appeal and Employment Appeal Tribunal”, and the 2027 edition reports that “Claire is extremely thorough in her approach”. 

   

  Her industrial action experience includes acting for the Secretary of State for Justice in an urgent application for an injunction to restrain the Prison Officers’ Association from calling industrial action, and acting for Great Ormond Street Hospital to obtain interim relief restricting pickets and protests in the immediate vicinity of the hospital. 

   

  Her industrial relations cases include:

  • R (ASLEF and others) v Secretary of State for Business and Trade [2023] EWHC 1781 (Admin), [2023] ICR 1405, [2023] IRLR 823 (acting for the Secretary of State, led by Daniel Stilitz KC), the challenge by thirteen trade unions to the regulations permitting agency workers to cover for striking workers; 
  • R (FDA, PCSU and Prospect) v Minister for the Cabinet Office [2018] EWHC 2746 (Admin) (acting for the three unions, led by Martin Westgate QC), concerning consultation with recognised trade unions over civil service pay guidance; 
  • Hamon v University College London [2024] EWHC 1744 (KB) (acting for UCL), claims by more than 5,000 students arising from disruption caused by UCU industrial action and Covid-19. 

  She is lead counsel for five teaching unions (NAHT, NASUWT, NEU, ASCL and Community) in an ongoing judicial review of the Teaching Regulation Agency’s compliance with its Public Sector Equality Duty (see coverage in Schools Week and Tes). She has written on the trade union reforms in the Employment Rights Act 2025, including “What happens when equality representatives get statutory teeth?” (with Harry Sheehan, Devereux Chambers, October 2026).

• Public Law and Judicial Review

  Until she took silk, Claire spent six years as a member of the Attorney General’s A Panel. She was a member of the B and C Panels before that. 

  She has been instructed in a wide range of public law cases both for and against local and central government, particularly cases which raise issues of discrimination and retained EU Law. 

  Her recent public law work includes acting as lead counsel for five trade unions representing c. 900,000 teachers and headteachers in a judicial review about the alleged failure of the Teaching Regulation Agency to comply with the Public Sector Equality Duty, ongoing (see examples of media coverage here and here).

• Education Law

  According to The Legal 500 2025 "Claire is an authority on all matters relating to discrimination within the field of education law." 

   

  She has acted in a number of significant education appeals, including Proprietor of Ashdown House School v JKL [2019] ELR 530 on discriminatory exclusions, and R. (on the application of Thilakawardhana) v Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education [2018] E.L.R. 223 on student fitness to practise proceedings.

   

  Her recent education work has included representing the Department for Education in R. (on the application of Sharp) v Office of the Schools Adjudicator [2023] EWHC 1242 (Admin), a judicial review of school admission arrangements; and defending Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge against a claim for religious discrimination brought by Christian Concern, see links to media coverage here and here.

• Pensions

  Claire was junior counsel for Innospec in the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court in Walker v Innospec Ltd & Ors [2017] UKSC 47. She has subsequently been involved in a number of pensions discrimination cases, including Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Beattie [2023] I.R.L.R 13, [2023] Pens. L.R. 3 on whether the Age Exceptions Order is compliant with retained EU Law. 

  She represented the employer in Newell Trustees Limited v Newell Rubbermaid UK Services Limited & Ors [2024] EWHC 48 (Ch), successfully persuading the High Court that the automatic transfer of employees from a final salary pension scheme into a money purchase scheme had not amounted to unlawful age discrimination. 

  Claire acted for The Pensions Regulator in its enforcement action against Hermes (now Evri) which resulted in its couriers being auto-enrolled into a pension scheme (see media coverage here and here).

  Read her recent piece on litigating historic issues in pensions discrimination claims for the Pensions Barrister blog here, and her recent article for PLC Magazine on pensions discrimination is here.

• Selected Reported Cases

  Court of Appeal and Supreme Court

  • Walker v Innospec Ltd & others [2017] UKSC 47, [2017] 4 All ER 1004, [2017] I.R.L.R 928, [2017] I.C.R 1077 (Supreme Court): pension entitlement for same-sex couples pre-Civil Partnership Act 2004, junior counsel for Innospec.
  • Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia (Cultural Bureau) v Alhayali [2026] I.C.R 196, [2026] 2 All ER 696; [2025] I.R.L.R 918 (CA): lead counsel for Embassy, application of the State Immunity Act 1978 to overlapping employment and personal injury claims.
  • Sullivan v Isle of Wight Council [2025] I.R.L.R 520, [2025] I.C.R 1299 (CA): whether whistleblowing protections extend to job applicants.
  • Nursing and Midwifery Council v Somerville [2022] I.C.R 755, [2022] I.R.L.R 447 (CA): lead counsel in Court of Appeal on whether mutuality of obligations is required to establish worker status; junior counsel on application for permission to appeal to Supreme Court.
  • Gwynedd Council v Barratt and another [2021] I.R.L.R 1028, [2021] ELR 747 (CA): fairness requirements in redundancy exercises in maintained schools (sole counsel for successful claimants).
  • Heskett v Secretary of State for Justice [2021] I.C.R 110, [2021] I.R.L.R 132 (CA): when cost considerations can amount to a legitimate aim in indirect discrimination (lead counsel for the successful respondent).
  • Brown v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2020] 1 WLR 1257, [2020] 3 All ER 273 (CA): application of QOCS to mixed claims (lead counsel for the appellant in Court of Appeal, junior counsel on application for permission to appeal to Supreme Court).
  • Graysons Restaurants Ltd v Jones [2019] 3 All ER 688, [2019] I.C.R 1342, [2019] I.R.L.R 649 (CA): whether equal pay claims are arrears of pay under insolvency protection (appointed amicus curiae).
  • Abrahall v Nottingham City Council [2018] I.C.R 1425: leading authority on variation of contract; junior counsel for the local authority on application to Supreme Court for permission to appeal.  
  • Krishna Moorthy v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2018] I.R.L.R 860, [2018] I.C.R 1326 (CA): tax treatment of injury to feelings awards (lead counsel for the appellant).

  • R (on the application of Thilakawardhana) v Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education [2018] EWCA Civ 13, [2018] ELR 223: fitness to practise of a medical student (sole counsel for the university. 

    ---

  Employment Appeal Tribunal

  • Anne v Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust [2026] I.R.L.R 354 (EAT): indirect race discrimination and TUPE.
  • Jallali v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2025] EAT 137; whether nationally determined terms and conditions were less favourable to part-time police inspectors (lead counsel for the Secretary of State for the Home Department; now before the Court of Appeal).
  • Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia (Cultural Bureau) v Alhayali [2023] EAT 149, [2024] I.R.L.R 381: application of the State Immunity Act 1978 to an employee in an embassy’s academic and cultural affairs department.
  • Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Beattie [2023] I.R.L.R 13, [2023] 2 CMLR 10, [2023] Pens LR 3 (EAT): whether the ET erred in disapplying the Equality Act (Age Exceptions for Pension Schemes) Order 2010 (sole counsel for the successful appellant).
  • Dobson v Cumbria Partnership NHS Foundation Trust [2021] I.R.L.R 729, [2021] I.C.R 1699 (EAT): judicial notice in an indirect sex discrimination claim.
  • Heal v Chancellor, Masters and Scholars of the University of Oxford and others [2020] I.C.R 1294 (EAT): reasonable adjustments and recording of ET hearings (sole counsel for ten Oxford colleges).
  • Ameyaw v PricewaterhouseCoopers Services Ltd [2019] I.R.L.R 611, [2019] I.C.R 976 (EAT): power of the ET to exclude judgments from the public register (sole counsel for PwC).
  • Ministry of Justice v Blackford [2018] I.R.L.R 688 (EAT): part-time workers.
  • Secretary of State for Justice v Lown [2016] I.R.L.R 22 (EAT): substitution mindset in unfair dismissal cases.
  • Higgins v Home Office and Attorney General [2015] I.C.R D19 (EAT): Rule 12 of the ET Rules of Procedure 2013.
  • Daler-Rowney Ltd v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2015] I.C.R 632 (EAT): compliance of the National Minimum Wage Regulations 1999 with EU law.
  • U v Butler & Wilson Ltd [2014] All ER (D) 34 (Sep) (EAT): disabled litigants in person in the ET.
  • Akanu-Otu v Secretary of State for Justice; Ahmadi-Assalemi v NCR Ltd [2014] I.C.R D13 (EAT): non-compliance with a deposit order.
  • Rynda Real Estate Asset Management Ltd v Rhijnsburger [2013] All ER (D) 73 (Sep) (EAT): principal purpose of an organised grouping under TUPE.
  • Hill v Governing Body of Great Tey Primary School [2013] I.C.R 691 (EAT): Polkey and Article 10 ECHR.
  • Rembiszewski v Atkins [2013] All ER (D) 206 (Feb) (EAT): timing for assessing practicability of re-engagement.
  • Raggett v John Lewis Plc [2012] I.R.L.R 906, [2012] 6 Costs LR 1053 (EAT): recovery of VAT on ET costs awards.
  • Tokyo Industries 5 v Megwa [2012] All ER (D) 281 (May) (EAT).
  • Enterprise Management Services Ltd v Connect-Up Ltd [2012] I.R.L.R 190 (EAT): service provision changes under TUPE.
  • Phillips v Xtera Communications Ltd [2012] I.C.R 171, [2011] I.R.L.R 724 (EAT): meaning of “election” under s.188 TULRCA 1992.
  • Tiffin v Lester Aldridge LLP [2011] I.R.L.R 105 (EAT): employment status of LLP partners.
  • Reddy v Bedfordshire & Luton Partnership NHS Trust [2010] All ER (D) 64 (Oct).
  • J v DLA Piper UK LLP [2010] I.R.L.R 936, [2010] I.C.R 1052 (EAT): meaning of disability.

  ---

  High Court

  • R (on the application of United Grand Lodge of England) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2026] EWHC 330 (Admin): challenge to the requirement that Metropolitan Police staff and officers disclose Freemasonry membership.
  • Hamon and others v University College London [2024] EWHC 1744 (KB), [2024] All ER (D) 55 (Jul): claims by university students concerning disruption caused by Covid and industrial action.
  • Newell Trustees Ltd v Newell Rubbermaid UK Services Ltd and another [2024] EWHC 48 (Ch), [2024] All ER (D) 99 (Jan): whether the non-discrimination rule was breached by a 1992 pension scheme amendment.
  • R (on the application of Walker) v Secretary of State for Justice [2023] EWHC 2715, [2023] All ER (D) 88 (Nov): judicial review of refusal to allow a prisoner to undertake IVF treatment.
  • R (on the application of ASLEF) v Secretary of State for Business and Trade [2023] I.R.L.R 823, [2023] I.C.R 1405: judicial review of the Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Businesses (Amendment) Regulations 2022.
  • R (on the application of Sharp) v Office of the Schools Adjudicator [2023] EWHC 1242 (Admin): judicial review concerning school admissions (acting for the Department for Education as intervenor).
  • R (S) v Camden Borough Council [2018] EWHC 3354 (Admin), [2019] ELR 129: judicial review of amendments to an EHC Plan.
  • R (on the application of FDA, PCSU and Prospect) v Minister for the Cabinet Office [2018] EWHC 2746 (Admin): consultation with recognised trade unions over pay guidance (junior counsel).
  • Nursing and Midwifery Council v Harrold [2016] I.R.L.R 30 (QB): civil restraint order restraining ET proceedings.
  • Ashworth and others v Royal National Theatre [2014] 4 All ER 238, [2014] I.R.L.R 526: representation of the War Horse musicians.
  • R (National Secular Society) v Bideford Town Council [2012] EWHC 175 (Admin), [2012] 2 All ER 1175, [2012] LGR 211: legality of Christian prayers at council meetings.

  ---

  Other Significant Cases

  • Samira Ahmed v British Broadcasting Corporation [2020] UKET 2206858/2018: widely publicised equal pay claim; whether the claimant's presenting work was "like work" with that of a male comparator (sole counsel for the successful claimant).
  • Proprietor of Ashdown House School v JKL [2019] UKUT 259 (AAC), [2019] ELR 530: jurisdiction of the First-tier Tribunal to order reinstatement of a disabled pupil.
  • Eremia and others v Republic of Moldova [2013] EqLR 911, [2013] ECHR 3564/11 (European Court of Human Rights): domestic violence as gender-based discrimination.
  • Black v Arriva North East Ltd [2013] EqLR 558: disability discrimination and wheelchair users on buses.

• Additional Work

  Claire has advised on and/or contributed to numerous responses to policy consultations. She advised the Government Equalities Office on its 2019 consultation on Sexual Harassment in the Workplace.

  Between 2019 and 2024 Claire was an elected member of the Employment Law Bar Association’s Committee and was the Committee member responsible for the Employment Appeal Tribunal’s pro bono scheme (ELAAS). She sits on the UK Employment Lawyers Association’s International Committee.

Latest from Claire

• News

  • Claire Darwin KC successful in significant EAT appeal on state immunity and sovereign wealth funds
  • Devereux nominated across three categories at IEL Awards 2026
  • From Trailblazer to Playing Catch-up: Claire Darwin KC examines the UK’s approach to pay transparency

• Articles

  • What happens when equality representatives get statutory teeth?