Russell Bradley

Year of Call: 2012

07968 558847
View LinkedIn Profile

Photo of Russell Bradley

Extremely tenacious when needed and great with clients

Legal 500 2020

Displays excellent empathy with clients, is quick to focus on relevant issues, has good advocacy skills and responds quickly

Chambers & Partners 2020

Russell Bradley was admitted as an advocate on 1st June 2012. Prior to that, he was in private practice as a solicitor for over 20 years. In the latter 10 years, he worked exclusively in the employment field as partner and head of the Scottish employment team with the global law firm  DLA Piper. His work covered the whole gamut of employment issues. He was accredited as a specialist in employment law by the Law Society of Scotland and has retained that exclusive focus on employment work in his years since coming to the Scottish Bar.

His practice is primarily first instance in the employment tribunal where he is regularly and frequently instructed across the UK by many well-known brand names in the retail, finance, facilities and transport industries.

His covenant work involves advising both employers and employees on their enforceability and appearing when they are litigated, for interim and final remedies.

Recent Court advice includes successful action against a former employee for payment of substantial damages arising from breach of the implied term of honesty and good faith, and interim orders to prevent industrial action in a dispute on TULR(C)A 1992 section 229 (2D).

He is ranked by both Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners for employment in Scotland.

Legal 500 2020 says Russell is “Extremely tenacious when needed and great with clients“. In 2019 the Legal 500 said he is “He is proactive, commercial and precise” and Chambers and Partners described him as “Commercial, concise, sensible and switched-on“.


Thank you for your work in this case. It is clear that this substantially contributed to the client’s success.” (Senior Associate, Employment team, National firm)

Russell recently represented our client in a difficult disability discrimination and unfair dismissal claim. His commitment to the case was exceptional and, along with a practical, hands on approach, his ability to identify the key points and demonstrate excellent advocacy skills was coupled with an ability to put the client at ease in stressful circumstances.” (Partner, national law firm and accredited specialist in Employment Law)

The Tribunal records its appreciation of the wholly professional manner in which Mr Bradley, in furtherance of the duty owed by him, in his capacity as an officer of court, to both the Tribunal and to the claimant as a party litigant, conducted himself towards the claimant in assisting him as required in the course of the Hearing.  Mr Bradley’s conduct in that regard, which was proactively acknowledged by the claimant, materially assisted the presentation of the claimant’s case and the Tribunal’s consideration and determination of the issues.” (Employment Judge, Edinburgh)

Thank you very much indeed for your assistance throughout this matter, which has been invaluable.” (Employment solicitor, Sheffield)

My clients are absolutely delighted with the outcome and I am grateful for the care and attention that you dedicated to preparing the case for the hearing.” (Partner, solicitor, national law firm)

I am grateful to …. … Mr Bradley for the exceptionally high standard of representation in this case.” (Employment judge, Edinburgh)

Thank you for dealing with this so professionally.” (Partner and Employment specialist, Edinburgh)

Thanks for all your help  …… it was great to work with you and I will have no hesitation in recommending you.” (Partner, solicitor, Preston, Lancs)

We will always be grateful to you for your hard work, energy, passion and determination.” (Client, after successful claim of disability discrimination in the sheriff court)

Many thanks for all of your assistance throughout. It was notable that you were prepared to go the extra mile to assist and give extremely useful help as the case progressed. Having worked with you in this case, I will certainly have no hesitation in instructing you in future.” (Partner and accredited specialist in Employment Law, Perth)

Recent litigation work includes:

  • Successful defence of multiple claims including automatic unfair dismissal (TUPE) arguing that TUPE did not apply in a mixed share transfer/hive up
  • Defence of claim for unpaid bonus against transferee, including the question of “substantial equivalence”; claim ultimately withdrawn by trade union
  • “service provision” changes, including disputes on the nature of activities performed and whether employees and groups of employees were assigned to an organized grouping
  • Whether claimants can maintain claims against only a transferee for a failure to consult
  • A claim by a transferee against a transferor for a failure to provide relevant “employee liability information”
  • The impact of TUPE on a claim for a death in service benefit brought by executors
    for transferor in a “failure to inform and consult” claim by trade union
  • Defence of claims of unlawful discrimination brought by transsexual (settled)
  • Successful defence of claims by apprentice following his dismissal of claims under every type of discrimination available under the disability legislation
  • Successful defence of claim of victimisation (racial assault) against FTSE 100 trading company
  • for (dismissed) sales manager claimants in claims of age discrimination; claims settled for a five figure sum
  • Sheriff court action against landlord for injury to feelings arising out of allegations of racial abuse and harassment by landlord’s staff. Questions of causation and vicarious liability.
  • Claims of maternity and pregnancy discrimination including allegations of a failure to comply with Regulation 10 of the
  • Maternity and Parental Leave etc. Regulations 1999
  • Claim of associative discrimination by reference to “Fragile X” syndrome and whether that is a disability
  • Claim of age discrimination by minister of religion
Restrictive Covenants
  • The impact of TUPE on the enforceability of a covenant post transfer
  • The proper measure of loss in a claim for damages for breach of a covenant
  • Whether it is appropriate to grant interim interdict where money loss can be accurately quantified
  • Whether employer can reclaim settlement agreement sums as damages for alleged breach of covenants
  • Successful defence of claim of automatic unfair dismissal in claim against two “employers”;  issues of joint and several liability focussing on relevance of McTigue v University Hospital Bristol NHS Foundation Trust [2016] I.C.R. 1155 and Day v Lewisham & Greenwich NHS Trust and another [2017] I.C.R. 917
  • For claimant alleging unfair dismissal, the whistleblowing concerning financial irregularities in the preparation of material for statutory accounts.
  • For claimant alleging unfair dismissal, victimisation and breach of contract, having blown the whistle on health and safety issues about products sold by the respondent.
  • For respondent defending claim of whistleblowing unfair dismissal claim brought by senior executive and chartered accountant. Successful at interim relief hearing.
  • For respondent owners of nursing care home in a claim of unfair dismissal brought by a registered nurse who had alleged ill-treatment of service users
Representative cases

Representative appeal cases

Franco Pizza Limited t/a Domino’s Pizza v Gould and Fraser; EAT
Employment Tribunal failed to properly apply section 98(4) ERA 1996, case remitted for re-hearing.

Scottish Ambulance Service v John Laing; EAT
Unless Order; impact of non-compliance, conditional judgment.

Swanston New Golf Club Ltd v Gallagher; EAT
Compensatory awards; Contributory conduct; Polkey reductions;

City of Edinburgh Council v Kaur
Inner House; opposition to motion for leave to appeal race discrimination claim to the Supreme Court.

Cases worked on as a solicitor

  • AB v [name withheld]; for dentist summarily dismissed on allegations of fraud; working with him on internal appeal resulting in re-instatement to post and abandonment of threatened criminal proceedings and referral to General Dental Council.
  • CD v [name withheld] plc; for high street bank in a claim before the Employment Tribunal in which the claimant sought a remedy under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 in respect of an abatement to a company pension taking account of State pension received. •Kitsons Environmental Europe Ltd v Hendry UKEATS/0002/08; A finding by an employment tribunal as to the extent to which compensatory award for an unfair dismissal should be reduced set aside as the tribunal had provided no reasons for making the finding. •Loy v Abbey National Financial & Investment Services plc 2006 SLT 761; for Abbey in defending a claim by a former national account manager that post TUPE transfer, his new role was sufficiently different to pre-transfer role to entitle him to a claim for a contractual redundancy payment.
  • Dignity Funerals Ltd v Bruce 2005 1 S.C. 59; for employer in appeal from employment tribunal and Scottish EAT, the Court overturning EAT’s decision to increase compensatory award where the claimant had suffered from a reactive depressive illness from the date of dismissal.
  • [Names withheld]; for brand name plc bank advising on remedies following the poaching of a 25 man team including directors and senior fund managers.
  • Donlon v Colonial Mutual Group (UK Holdings) Ltd 1998 SC 244; appeal from Sheriff and Sheriff Principal on employer’s delictual duties to former employee on providing a reference to future employer.
  • Interconnection Systems Limited v Holland 1994 SLT 777; arrestment on the dependence in proceedings for damages for inducing a breach of a contract following the recovery of confidential documents containing price sensitive information under Section 1 of the Administration of Justice (Scotland) Act 1972.
  • Eclipse Blinds Ltd v Bill EAT 818/92; EAT stressed that the task of the tribunal was to take into account all the circumstances rather than to isolate one factor, such as whether consultation would have made any difference
Practice Areas

Contact our clerks

Normal business hours are 9am to 5pm, Monday to Friday.
+44 (0)131 260 5674 (9am to 5pm)

Alan Moffat

Advocates' Clerk

Working in Office

Jennifer Dunn

Deputy Advocates' Clerk

(working days Mondays to Thursdays)

Working Remotely

Sheena Hume

Deputy Advocates' Clerk

Working Remotely

Shawn McArthur

Deputy Advocates' Clerk


Kathryn Ferguson

Deputy Advocates' Clerk

Working Remotely

Emma Busby

Deputy Advocates' Clerk

Working in Office

M.A., 1984; LL.B, 1986; Dip LP, 1987

Appointments & Memberships


Employment Tribunal Judge (Scotland) (November 2020 to date)

Reporter on Employment Law to the Faculty of Advocates Law Reform Committee (2013 to date)

Employment Expert Q&A Panel Author for LexisNexis, publishers of Harvey and IRLR


Employment Lawyers Association

Court and Tribunal Experience

Employment tribunal (Scotland and England), Employment Appeal Tribunal, Sheriff Court, Court of Session (Outer House), Inner House and Commercial Court


Articles published in Greens Employment Law Bulletin

Russell has written regularly for the Bulletin in the last five years. His most recent publications are:

  • Disability facts lead to appeal losses – August 2015
  • In the public interest: clarity or confusion? on the question of whistleblowing – August 2016


  • Author of Scottish material for LexisNexis employment content
  • To the response from the Employment Lawyers Association to the Law Society of Scotland’s discussion paper: “Legal Assistance in Scotland Fit for the 21st Century”
  • To the response from the Employment Lawyers Association to Consultation on Draft Order in Council for the Transfer of Specified Functions of the Employment Tribunal to the First-tier Tribunal for Scotland