A barrister who brought a claim for £3m against members of his former chambers has been told the action was brought out of time. Jon Holbrook brought proceedings against 10 individuals from Cornerstone Chambers alleging he was discriminated against for his political beliefs in the aftermath of a tweet he posted in January 2021.
Holbrook had said that the Equality Act ‘undermines school discipline by empowering the stroppy teenager of colour’ and claimed that following the tweet he was victimised and harassed in various ways.
But Employment Judge Brown, sitting at London Central tribunal, dismissed the claim on the basis it was not brought until September 2021 – long beyond the three-month deadline.
The judge rejected Holbrook’s submissions that he was distracted at the relevant time by disciplinary proceedings from the Bar Standards Board (Holbrook was cleared on appeal of breaching handbook rules) and had been wrongly advised by a solicitor about how long he had to bring proceedings.
The judge also rejected the argument that the nature of Holbrook’s claim, relating to rights of freedom of expression, should override the other factors relevant to his discretion. ‘I was not persuaded that the claimant’s complaints of discrimination were more important or weighty than many other discrimination complaints, based on other characteristics, brought to the tribunal,’ said the judge. ‘The claimant’s complaints are not in a special category requiring more favourable consideration.’
The tribunal heard that in the days following the 2021 tweet, chambers colleagues phoned and emailed Holbrook asking him to take it down and saying he had breached social media policy. The chambers made a public statement denouncing the views expressed, which Holbrook said challenged the merit and worth of his political belief and implied that its views were better than his.
Holbrook, a barrister for 30 years, claimed that Cornerstone declined to accept his resignation as it wanted to expel him ‘so as to satiate the appetites of those who wanted revenge for [his] expression of non-woke beliefs’.
The judge said Holbrook’s failure to bring his claim in time was his ‘own considered decision’ and that even if he had been misled by his legal adviser, the delays before then were ‘wholly’ his responsibility for which there was no good reason.
In a statement, Holbrook said he intended to appeal the decision to strike out the claim, reiterating that the delay was against the background of developing law on belief discrimination and a potentially career-ending investigation by the BSB.
He added: ‘In the meantime I have returned to the bar and am using my 30 years of legal experience to advocate for others who have experienced the unjustness of cancel culture.’
