🎙️ New Episode Alert: Having a Natter

This week, Simon and David dive into the case of Borisov v American International Group UK Ltd (AIG) where the Claimant’s own conduct led to his claim being struck out.

David takes us through the facts and Simon talks about the judgment.

But because this is Having a Natter, the legal analysis is only half the fun.

The rest of the episode?

So if you fancy:

…then this episode is for you.

🎙️ NEW ‘Having a NatteRR’ episode! ⚖️☕

In this episode, Simon and David explore the case of Garner v Thorpe Hall Leisure — an important reminder of the duty to make reasonable adjustments.

David talks us through the facts of the case, while Simon takes on the judgment — both sharing insights, practical takeaways.

And of course, no natteRR is complete without the banter section — expect family updates, weekend plans, and the usual off-topic detours.

🎧 Tune in for legal insight with a generous splash of personality.

In the latest episode of "Having a NatteRR", Simon and David discuss DB v Financial Services Compensation Scheme Ltd, an unfair dismissal claim in which the Claimant was sacked for inadvertently exposing his private parts during a work Teams call.

David talks us through the facts and Simon goes through the judgment.

Also featuring:

☕ David’s trip to Wrexham

🥐 Simon’s dream about Ryan Reynolds and a Premier Inn breakfast

Whether you're here for the legal insight, the laughs, or the low-key love for Welsh football clubs, this one’s not to be missed.

In the latest episode of 'Having a NatteRR', Simon and David explore the case of Rooke v NHS Blood and Transplant, in which the Claimant was awarded nearly £30,000 after being compared to Darth Vader at work.

🧑‍⚖️ David lays out the facts.

Whether you're into employment law, HR issues, or just want to hear two solicitors try to out-nerd each other on all things intergalactic, this one’s for you.

In this week’s Having a Natter, Simon and David tackle the case of Forrester-Hayes v Scania (Great Britain) Ltd, which involved a claim of discrimination arising from disability.

🧠 David walks us through the facts

⚖️ Simon breaks down the judgment

👏 And we all go home happy (or at least slightly better informed)

But it wouldn’t be Having a Natter without a generous helping of actual nattering...

Expect:

📺 80s nostalgia (Birds Eye Steakhouse Grills, anyone?)

🍊 A hark back to when orange juice was considered a starter

🍷 A deep—and entirely inconclusive—debate on whether port really does come from Portugal (we’re still not sure… are you?)

In the latest episode of Robinson Ralph’s ever unpopular podcast "Having a NatteRR", Simon and David take on the serious stuff and the shed stuff.

This week’s legal spotlight: Yousif v The Good Shepherd Trust, a case involving a claim of harassment related to race. As ever, Simon and David break it down and highlight the lessons for employers.

And let us not forget the banter section (aka “Middle-aged Men Do Outdoorsy Things”) which in this episode covers:

🧹 Clearing out sheds

If you’re looking for employment law insights with a side of dad jokes, questionable DIY chat, and the occasional philosophical musings about garden furniture – this one’s for you.

This week, Simon and David bring you their usual mix of:

The episode kicks off with a riveting* update on their personal lives—expect tales of minor inconveniences, questionable life choices, and the kind of detail no one asked for. (*Riveting status not guaranteed.)

Then, onto the real reason you’re here: employment law. We take a look at Selkin v Opico Ltd, where the tribunal found that procedural irregularities in the dismissal process fell outside the band of reasonable responses—a key reminder of how getting the process right matters just as much as the decision itself.

🎧 Tune in now to catch the full discussion!

In the latest episode of Having a Natter, Simon and David dive into the case of Hamilton v Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust, a claim of constructive unfair dismissal. The Claimant resigned in January 2022, citing “cruel bullying behaviours” and poor management. They discuss the key takeaways for employers and what this case means in practice.

And in a double first, we’ve stepped up our tech game – recording with two new microphones and from two different locations. Isn’t technology brilliant? (Well, most of the time…)

Tune in to hear Simon and David’s thoughts on the case, what it means for employers, and of course, their usual dose of wit and wisdom.

In this episode, Simon and Dave dive into the case of Higgs v Farmor’s School, in which the claimant was dismissed from a secondary school after she shared Facebook posts criticising plans to teach about LGBT+ relationships in primary schools.

They also (once again) explain the difference between acronyms and initialisms—because apparently, some people still don’t know the difference.

And if that wasn’t enough, they somehow manage to crowbar in a few Steps song titles. Tragedy? Maybe. Worth a listen? Absolutely.

Join Simon and Dave in this first episode of the new series as they break down the case of Ashraf v NHS England, which included an allegation that shortly before the claimant was due to go on maternity leave, she was told that she was mad for having more children.

They discuss the judgment, key takeaways for employers, and what this case means in practice.

And because no 'Having a Natter' episode is complete without a few unexpected tangents, they also find time to talk about James Blunt and poultry rebellion.