+44 (0)20 7822 1200
"Her approach to each different case is mind-blowing"Chambers UK 2020
"Particularly good for complex cases involving disability and mental health issues"Legal 500 2020
"A very skillful advocate who is formidably intelligent and very hard-working"Chambers UK 2018
“Her advocacy oozes persuasiveness”Legal 500 2017
"She really does go that extra mile in delivering an excellent service"Legal 500 2016
"Formidable work ethic and intelligence"Legal 500
“Organised, reliable and brings extra quality to drafting"Legal 500
Rehana specialises in personal injury and employment law, especially occupational stress, harassment, and discrimination claims. She is the Head of Chambers’ Employment Team.
“Formidable work ethic and intelligence” (Legal 500, 2014), Rehana has been recommended as a leading Junior in the Legal 500 since 2010. She co-authored “Litigating Psychiatric Injury Claims” (Bloomsbury Professional, 2012), a Practitioners’ Guide, combining her expertise in both personal injury and employment law. She became an Accredited Advocacy Trainer for the Inner Temple in 2012, teaching at the highest advocacy level (New Practitioner) and was promoted to Advocacy Teacher Trainer in 2014. She is Course Director of the Pupils’ Advocacy Training Programme at the Inner Temple. In July 2019, she was named by the The Lawyer as one of the top 3 busiest female juniors at the Employment Bar, in the EAT.
Rehana is Patron of Bird & Bird’s Bursary Foundation and has been a guest speaker on BBC World News and the BBC World Service on equality issues in the workplace. She was a specialist panel speaker at the BBC’s 100 Women of the Century Event in October 2013 which was broadcast internationally. She won the National Asian Women of Achievement Award in 2009 for Young Achiever of the Year and was a Finalist at the British Muslim Awards 2013. She has been featured in the International Asian Who’s Who Guide since 2012.
Rehana deals with cases in the High Court, ET, EAT and Court of Appeal. Reported cases include NAS v East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust  4 WLUK 319, Puthenveetil v Alexander and Secretary of State for BEI  1 WLUK 549, Bone v North Essex Partnership NHS Trust (Court of Appeal)  IRLR 295, Nambalat v Tayeb and Ors (Court of Appeal)  All ER (D) 62,  IRLR 1004, Mohammed Najib v John Laing PLC (High Court)  All ER (D) 203 and Julio v Jose and Others (EAT) 2012 [IRLR] 180,  All ER (D) 100.
Rehana is the Head of Chambers’ Employment Group. She has an extremely busy practice in all areas of employment law. In July 2019, she was named by The Lawyer as being in the Top 3 busiest female juniors in the EAT at the Employment Bar.
Two of her cases are the leading authorities in their specialist areas (Bone v NEP, TULRCA 1992 and Nambalat v Tayeb and Others, NMW 1999). “Formidable work ethic and intelligence” (Legal 500, 2014), Rehana has been recommended as a leading Junior in the Legal 500 since 2010. She is an impressive and highly sought after advocate with an excellent record of trial and appeal victories, and who is highly respected for her handling of particularly sensitive cases involving public interest disclosure, fraud and abuse. She has a variety of clients ranging from the NHS and local government to international companies in the commercial, media, medical, financial and insurance fields.
Reported cases between 2018 and 2019 include the following:
- Nasser Arjomand-Sissan v East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust (2019) EAT – LTL 18/4/2019:  4 WLUK 319
- Camden And Islington NHS Foundation Trust v N Uddin (2018) EAT – LTL 7/3/2019 :  12 WLUK 1
- Yovonie v East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust (2018) High Court –  EWHC 2328 (QB): LTL 3/8/2018 EXTEMPORE
- KPK Puthenveettil v (1) S Alexander (2) RJ George (3) Secretary of State for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (2018) EAT – LTL 25/4/2018 :  1 WLUK 549
Rehana has extensive experience of cross examining medical experts and dealing with complex medical evidence. She has taught cross examination of expert witnesses to practising barristers as an Accredited Advanced Advocacy Trainer for the Inner Temple since 2012. She has taught internationally including at the International Criminal Court in the Hague. Rehana is therefore able to deal with complex disability discrimination issues.
Rehana has particular expertise in occupational stress, harassment and discrimination claims, drawing on her experience of working in mental health prior to coming to the Bar. Rehana deals with numerous psychiatric injury claims involving both Employment Tribunal and County Court proceedings, and is able to deal with these dual claims equally effectively due to her high level of expertise in both employment law and personal injury. She is co-author of the book “Litigating Psychiatric Injury Claims” (Bloomsbury Professional 2012), a specific guide for both personal injury and employment law practitioners which includes valuable guidance on litigating claims including occupational stress, statutory harassment, and disability discrimination issues. She has also appeared on international tv and radio as a guest speaker on equality issues.
Cases of importance include:
Bone v North Essex Partnership NHS Trust (Court of Appeal)  All ER 964,  IRLR 635
This case is the leading authority on the issue of whether a Certificate of Independence obtained under TULRCA 1992 has retrospective effect and the meaning of “independence” for the purposes of making a claim under section 146 of TULRCA
- Puthenveetil v Alexander and George, EAT 2014
Dealing with the issue of whether the European Convention on Human Rights places positive duties upon the UK Government to provide legal aid to alleged victims of trafficking and abuse for the purposes of making a claim for damages under the National Minimum Wage Regulations 1999
- A Westerlind v CMC Markets UK Plc, 2013
High profile discrimination claim that was extensively covered in the national press
- Nambalat v Tayeb and Others  EWCA Civ 1249, Court of Appeal
The leading case on the interpretation of “as a family member” in Regulation 2(2) of the National Minimum Wage Regulations 1999. Rehana represented one of the successful Respondents as sole Counsel – all other parties were represented by silks. The case was reported in The Lawyer magazine’s “Judgment Call” and in The Law Gazette.
- Julio v Jose and Others 2012 [IRLR] 180,  All ER (D) 100, EAT
Representing one of the successful respondents in this widely reported case where the EAT provided comprehensive guidance on the construction and interpretation of regulation 2(2) of the National Minimum Wage Regulations 1999.
- Alam v London Probation Trust, UKEAT/0016/2012
Representing the successful respondent in this appeal where the EAT explored the issues of discretion of Employment Tribunal judges to strike out discrimination claims on merits and jurisdiction at a PHR.
- Ferguson v Whittington Hospital NHS Trust, UKEAT/0214/2011
The EAT examined the scope of discretion of an Employment Tribunal to award costs against an unsuccessful party.
Significant cases include:
PPF v The Open University, High Court (Birmingham District Registry), 2014
High value and high profile extensive stress at work claim involving multiple periods of absence and complex issues of medical and factual causation
- Mohammed Najib v John Laing PLC  All ER (D) 203
Personal injury mesothelioma claim providing valuable guidance on the principles of “lost years” claims and the recoverability of costs for alternative therapies.
- C v The Football League Ltd
Representing the Football League in a claim involving harassment on the grounds of sexual orientation.
- K v Honorable Societies of the Inner and Middle Temple
Representing the Inner and Middle Temples in a personal injury claim involving complex issues of jurisdiction and limitation.
- Occupational stress cases include:
- PPF v The Open University
- P v The University of Nottingham
- M v Sheffield University
- M v Metropolitan Police Commissioner (representing the Claimant)
- X v West Midlands Police Authority (representing the Defendant)
- F v Royal College of Nursing (representing the Defendant)
- M v Scope Ltd (representing the Defendant)
- A and TH v The Royal Mail (representing the Claimants)