Matthew Rudd
Call: 1994
Matthew Rudd
Head of Employment Law Team
ELA
FLBA
Chambers and Partners
Legal 500
Contact
T: 01274 722 560 or 0113 246 2600
Matthew is Head of the Employment Team with over 27 years experience. He undertakes work in the Employment Tribunal, Employment Appeal Tribunal and Higher Courts. He is also a member of the Family Team undertaking Financial Remedy and TOLATA and Inheritance Act work. Further, Matthew has expertise in sports law and civil claims relating to his Employment and Financial Remedy Practice.
Reputation
Matthew regularly presents at Employment and Family Seminars and undertakes private FDRs.
Matthew is ranked in Chambers and Partners and the Legal 500 for his Employment practice:
Chambers and Partners UK Bar
“Matthew is a very pragmatic advocate who appreciates the difficulties in a case. He was very cool and calm, and the client was very happy. Matthew has good client care skills, readily picked up the issues and provided sound advice. Matthew is a solid go-to barrister who cuts through the case to get to the key issues. Matthew's vast experience leads to wise and measured decisions." (2025)
”Matthew is very calm under fire and builds great rapport with clients, and he's good on his feet." (2024)
"Matthew Rudd is head of the chambers' employment law practice. He is well versed in a range of complex unfair dismissal and discrimination claims" (2023)
"Effective and enormously experienced, he has impressed me. He can really analyse the important merits of a claim." "An experienced employment barrister, he is thorough and pragmatic as well as being a good advocate." "He cuts through legal issues and explains everything with such ease." (2022)
Legal 500
“An unflappable barrister with gravitas and natural authority.” (2025)
“Band 2 Advocate” (2024)
"A tenacious advocate with a calming influence. Practical, thorough and exceptionally dedicated" (2023)
'An exceptionally dedicated barrister. He cuts through complex legal issues with ease. Experienced and unflappable.”(2022)
Expertise
Employment
As Head of the Employment Law Team, Matthew undertakes work for both employees and employers and has extensive experience in Unfair Dismissal, Discrimination, TUPE and Restrictive Covenants. He regularly handles multi-day cases with large bundles.
Family Law
Matthew has considerable experience in Financial Remedy high value asset cases and cases involving family businesses. He regularly undertakes TOLATA work and Inheritance Act Claims.
Civil and Sports Law
Matthew undertakes Civil and Sports Law work connected to his Employment and Family practice.
Notable Cases
F v H: Successful Claim for unfair dismissal and discrimination and successfully defended the appeal to the EAT;
C v SDCC Arguments over whether conditions amounted to a disability with a large number of witnesses and whether dismissal due to disability or SOSR;
F v JCT Claim involving unfair dismissal and disability discrimination. Respondents awarded £10,000 costs despite Claimant claiming to be impecunious;
B v SN Advising the Claimant in ongoing ET proceedings involving claims for harassment, victimisation and sexual orientation discrimination over a number of years;
I v A Represented the Claimant in a complex claim for breach of contract and unlawful deductions from wages with a counterclaim by the Respondent. Successful in all aspects of the claim;
U v L & C Complex case involving a TUPE transfer acting for the transferee who was jointly and severally liable for obligations of the transferor under regulations 13 and 14 of TUPE. Multi handed case involving test Claimants for 25 representative Claimants.
Clerks
Ian Miller
Call: 1999
Ian Miller
LLB (Hons) (Pg Dip) (FLBA)
Legal Aid Supplier Number 385FD
Contact
T: 01274 722 560 or 0113 246 2600
Ian is a renowned matrimonial finance and family trusts/TLATA Barrister. Ian also accept instructions in:
Breach of Confidence (and confidentiality)
Misuse of Private Information and how to protect privacy
Defamation (libel and slander)
Advice on publications, press releases and websites to as to ensure privacy is maintained, consents received, and that material published is not defamatory or in breach of copyright.
Ian is able to undertake private FDR hearings for Trusts of Land proceedings, Inheritance Act proceedings and Financial Remedy cases.
Reputation
In 2014, Ian joined the University of Bradford as a lecturer whilst maintaining his practice in Chambers. During his time at Bradford Ian set up the School of Law’s first Law Clinic, acted as Deputy Head for 3 years and was the Director of Clinical Legal Education. Ian resigned his associate professorship at Bradford in 2022 and was invited to head the School of Law and at Bloomsbury Institute London, where he was also appointed Director of the Institute’s Law Clinic programmes.
During Ian’s time in higher education he taught a wide range of core legal subjects including tort, family law, ethics and legal skills.
Ian enjoys teaching and is available to run training courses, upskilling and refresher courses for law firms in addition to more traditional seminars.
In the summer of 2024, Ian returned to practice full time.
Expertise
Family/Civil
Ian has worked in the field of matrimonial finance and TOLATA his entire career, but has focused principally on matrimonial finance and TOLATA since 2014, together with some civil/common law and 1975 Act cases. During his years of a mixed practice Ian undertook a broad range of civil and family work including child protection, professional negligence, Land Tribunal cases, employment law and general common law. These previous practice areas provide Ian with a good grounding in other areas of law that regularly pervade into complex financial remedy cases involving partnerships, third party property ownership, companies, and tracing.
Ian is able to undertake private FDR hearings for Trusts of Land proceedings, Inheritance Act proceedings and Financial Remedy cases. .
Sports Law
Having taught for several years at the University of Bradford, Ian has developed an expertise in defamation, privacy law, misuse of private information, breach of confidence and media law.
Ian developed modules on privacy and defamation law and taught law and media in the digital age to both undergraduate and post graduate students. Having now returned to full time practice with chambers, Ian is now accepting instructions in the following areas of media Law:
• Breach of Confidence (and confidentiality)
• Misuse of Private Information and how to protect privacy
• Defamation (libel and slander)
• Advice on publications, press releases and websites to as to ensure privacy is maintained, consents received, and that material published is not defamatory or in breach of copyright.
Notable Cases
B v B [2022]
Third generation family farm. Assets circa £2.5m gross. Wife well into retirement. Issue as to how the sharing principle should apply to the assets which were brought into the marriage solely by the H. Agreed that the H would pass the farm to the parties’ son. Matter compromised with the W receiving 25% of the assets.
S v S [2022]
In addition to a modest family home, the parties assets were comprised of a significant pension held by one party and valuable commercial land owned by the other with another family member and which was inherited. Should the court depart from equality after a very long marriage on the grounds that half the assets were inherited? If the party holding the inherited land could or should sell the land in question. How should the pension be divided? Matter compromised. Sharing was to apply to the inherited wealth given the length of the marriage (DJ). The inherited land could be released at some point when the party desired it and could be seen as akin to a pension fund for that party. Proceeds of sale of FMH sufficient to house both parties modestly if divided equally. Small pension share required to equalise capital position. 50:50 division of the whole of the assets was appropriate notwithstanding the inherited wealth.
M v C [2016]
Proprietary estoppel – declaration of trust – whether the court may vary the terms of a declaration of beneficial interest set out in a signed declaration on the grounds that the parties had entered into an explicit oral agreement post dating the original declaration.
M had agreed to re-mortgage their jointly owned home in order that C could inject capital into his business in order to support and promote it. The court found that the parties had explicitly agreed that C’s share in the home would be reduced accordingly, and that C would account to M for the benefit he had received on any future sale. The court finding also that C had agreed to meet the additional sums due each month under the mortgage as a result of the borrowing.
Court declaring that M was entitled to the same amount that C had borrowed as a first deduction before dividing the proceeds of sale equally between them. Hameed v Qayyam [2009] EWCA Civ 352 and Clarke v Meadus [2007] EWHC 352 relied upon. (a transcript of the judgment is available). Permission to appeal dismissed by the Court of Appeal.
Clerks