“Fabulous client-care skills with excellent attention to detail." - Employment (London), Legal 500 2023

“Mukhtiar is fantastic. He remains calm and is hard-working. Clients feel at ease with him and his human touch. His analysis of the law is always spot on, he thinks outside the box and judges respect him." "Mukhtiar is very easy to work with. He is very good with clients and personable with them, which goes a long way. He is also technically strong." - Employment (Band 1), Chambers and Partners 2022

“Mukhtiar is very switched on and pragmatic. He is extremely articulate and able to provide complex written advice which is concise, easy to read and perfectly drafted." "Clients feel at ease with Mukhtiar: he has the human touch. His analysis of the law is always spot on, he thinks outside of the box and judges respect him. He is my go-to person." - Commercial Dispute Resolution (South Eastern), Chambers and Partners 2022

“Mukhtiar is an absolute star. Concise on paper, brilliantly clear with clients, and thoroughly reliable. His advice is always pragmatic and well researched.” - Employment (Tier 1 South Eastern), Legal 500 2022

"He has superb interpersonal skills, and is very detail-orientated." - Commercial Litigation (South Eastern), Legal 500 2022

What clients say

“Mukhtiar was recommend to me by a solicitor. Mukhtiar played a vital role in helping resolve my dispute which was very complex. Mukhtiar is very passionate in employment law, he is keen to seek justice and is very detail orientated. Mukhtiar does not leave any stone unturned and he possesses a fountain of knowledge when it comes to employment disputes. I found Mukhtiar extremely knowable and his client care is outstanding. You are not just another case, to him you are person he values and will do his best to resolve the dispute. I highly recommend Mukhtiar Singh for any employment law disputes”. Lay client senior manager, race and disability detriment and dismissal claim brought against a leading bank.

For more client testimonials, click here. 

Mukhtiar had been ranked in employment by Chambers & Partners and the Legal 500 since 2018 for his Claimant and Respondent work. His depth of knowledge of employment law, coupled with over twenty-five years’ experience in employment relations, enables him to provide sound advice and practical solutions to employers and workers alike.

He has a particular interest in whistleblowing and discrimination disputes involving senior managers and executives in three sectors:

• Financial services. Mukhtiar has represented a number of senior executives in whistleblowing, discrimination and dismissal claims, which often call upon his experience with regulatory matters, partnership and company law. Since 2020, he has regularly advised and represented senior managers and executives selected for redundancy, often in a pool of one and in cases of sexual harassment. He has represented businesses pursing directors for breach of fiduciary duty; contractual claims relating to renumeration; breach of restrictive covenants; and claims relating to confidential information. Mukhtiar has provided training to various firms and written a number of articles on nonfinancial misconduct in the sector, specifically the FCA rules and guidance published in December 2025 (PS25/23).

• Healthcare. Mukhtiar’s experience in professional discipline is an invaluable tool when representing clients across the whole range of healthcare professions. Mukhtiar has dealt with numerous whistleblowing claims brought by doctors, nurses and other practitioners, which often overlap with sex, race or disability discrimination. He has a particular interest in global healthcare justice and for four years was a NED at Primary Care International. 

• Police. Mukhtiar represents police officers and staff across the country. As a former highly decorated Detective Inspector who has investigated all levels of crime across the country, he is able to use his experience to provide practical and robust advice and advocacy. He has experience of police cases involving disability discrimination; race and religious discrimination; and whistleblowing. Mukhtiar has experience of cases raising national security issues and closed material.

Through his work as a member of the Advisory Council of whistleblowing charity Protect, he advocates for law reform, culture change and sharing best practice. As a voluntary member of Protect’s Legal Support Network, he provides advice and representation, particularly on complex cases and interventions, for example, MacLennan v British Psychological Society [2024] EAT 166.

With a growing trend of workers making covert recordings, competitive trade and harvesting confidential information, he is often instructed by employers and executives in cases that overlap with his commercial practice, including breach of confidentiality; restraint of trade; negligent references; and wages claims, in particular bonuses.

NOTABLE AND RECENT CASES

• Represented and advised an embassy on four linked claims including allegations of sexual harassment and whistleblowing. The case raised issues concerning the uncertain law regarding state immunity and the defence of illegality (2025).

• Represented the Claimant in ten-day race discrimination claim brought against an NHS trust and the service provider company. The Claimant alleged he was victim of false allegations of sexual harassment based on racial stereotypes. The case settled mid-way through the final hearing (2025).

• Represented the Claimant in a disability discrimination and whistleblowing claim against one of the “Big Four” including at a negotiation which resulted in a settlement of over £400,000 (2025).

• MacLennan v British Psychological Society [2024] EAT 166. Led by Jeremy Lewis KC, represented leading whistleblowing charity Protect in a successful appeal concerning whether whistleblowing protection from detriment should extend to charity trustees and/or any worker that made protected disclosures prior to employment. The judgment can be found here; read more about the case here (2024).

• Represented a black female managing director in a sex and race discrimination claim brought against a global bank. Allegations included that she was unfairly criticised and disciplined based on racial stereotyping. Settlement was in excess of £700,000 (2024).

• Knight v Combined Technical Solutions Ltd. Represented the employer at final hearing who successfully defended age and race discrimination allegations in a pool of one redundancy situation (2024).

• Represented an NHS worker who made allegations of sexual assault and harassment against a senior doctor. Settlement included the Trust committing to widescale changes to the way it investigates such allegations in the future (2024).

• Ahmed v Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis. Represented a police officer at a seven-day final hearing who successfully argued that the police failed to make a reasonable adjustment of working from home exclusively and that he had suffered harassment in being required to return to the office. Press coverage can be found here (2024).

• Anderson v CAE Crewing Services Limited [2024] EAT 78. Represented the Appellant who succeeded in two separate appeals: Appeal 1 concerned agency/principal under section 109 of the Equality Act 2010; disability discrimination; and adequacy of reasons. Appeal 2 concerned unfavourable treatment because of something arises in consequence of disability under section 15 Equality Act 2010; and adequacy of reasons. The judgment is available here; read more about the case here (2024).

• Ramos v Nottinghamshire Women’s Aid Limited [2024] EAT 67. Following representation at a rule 3(10) hearing, His Honour Judge Tayler said (of Mukhtiar), “I am grateful for his clear, skilful and concise arguments” [at 11]. The judgment is available here.

• Verifone (UK) Ltd v Ms K Zena [2024] EAT 54. Appeal and cross-appeal, burden of proof section 136 of the Equality Act 2010. The judgment is available here.

• Represented a senior police officer in a disability discrimination (failing to make reasonable adjustment), which was concluded favourably following cross examination of the Respondent’s witness (2024).

• Obtained a settlement of £160,000 on behalf of a senior executive for a global derivative broker and dealer, following a claim for age discrimination and unfair dismissal (2023). 

• Gregory v Petro Trace Limited Case No. 3304188/2022. Represented a leading project geophysicist who successfully argued that the Respondent global geoscience company had created a sham redundancy and that he was subject to aggressive conduct after he challenged it. Claims for age discrimination, unfair dismissal, victimisation and breach of contract succeeded and he was awarded over £340,000 (2023). The judgment is available here. Press coverage here.

• Zena v Verifone Case No. 3303409/2021 (2023). Represented a (Black female) Claimant who successfully argued that she was unfairly dismissed and victimised by the Respondent multinational company, which provides technology solutions for electronic payments globally. This was a “pool of one” redundancy and the tribunal determined that the consultation and redundancy of her UK-based EMEA Regional Controller position was a sham, constructed so that an individual based in Poland could take her place. Somewhat unusually, the tribunal reached a majority decision that she was also victimised by failing to adequately investigate her allegations of race discrimination (2023). The judgment is available here.

• A six-day hearing representing a senior female manager bringing unfair dismissal and sex discrimination claims against a leading block and estate management company (2023).

• Successfully argued, on behalf of an international company responsible for providing feed solutions to farms, that a claim for unfair dismissal be struck out as premature (2023).

• Gooch v Felixstowe Dock and Railway Company Case No 3309559/2022. On behalf of the Respondent, successfully argued that the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear the claim and it should be struck out (2023).

• Laing v Bury & Bolton Citizens Advice [2022] EAT 85. Acting pro bono for the Appellant in five conjoined appeals involving witness orders, deposit orders (for a race discrimination claim), victimisation and apparent bias. The The Employment Appeal Tribunal agreed that there had been an appearance of unconscious confirmation bias. The judgment is available here. Read more about the case here.  

• An intervention at the EAT in which the issue was whether a charity trustee could bring a whistleblowing claim, in particular the application of Articles 10 (freedom of expression) and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights (freedom from discrimination) (2022).

• Represented a Claimant solicitor against a leading firm, who was dismissed whilst on maternity leave for allegedly failing to accept lesser terms during the Covid-19 pandemic (2022).

• Represented the Claimant who brought claims for age, sex and race discrimination against Warner Bros (2022).

• Represented in-house counsel of a pension fund managing company, who brought whistleblowing detriment and dismissal claims following disclosures regarding the board’s corporate governance duties (2022). 

• Instructed by two Claimants for a 22-day hearing against a leading European Bank and a number of individual workers. The claims included race and sex discrimination; whistleblowing; and Equal Pay (2022).  

• Represented a Claimant for a 12-day racial harassment, victimisation and dismissal claim against a high-profile charity. The client alleged she was gaslighted following her allegations of discrimination which included tokenism (2021).

• Five-day whistleblowing case. Acted for a Claimant whistleblower (making serious allegations of fraud) against a multinational technology corporation (2021). 

• Mehdinejad v Royal Mail Case No: 2204261/2019 (2020). Disability harassment claim, including an award of aggravated damages, where the claimant suffered from ADHD, dyslexia and dyspraxia. The client said Mukhtiar “understood my needs as a disabled claimant… this was critical to success”. Press coverage can be found here.

• Seven-day unfair dismissal claim on behalf of a Claimant junior trader who had been dismissed by a leading global bank following allegations of market manipulation (spoofing) (2020).

• Sethi v Elements Personnel Services Ltd Case no. 2300234/2018 (2019). Successfully argued that the no-beard policy of a recruitment agency, which provided staff to 5-star hotels in London, was indirect religious discrimination as it put Sikhs at a particular disadvantage. The case was reported globally and the judgment is available here.

• Parkin v Leeds City Council UKEAT/0178/19 (2019). Successfully appeals on two grounds that allegations of sex discrimination and harassment should not have been struck out either as there being no prospect of success and the ET failed to apply the two-part test of Hasan v Tesco Stores. The judgment is noteworthy as to the approach to multiple discrimination claims with lengthy pleadings and is available here.

Mukhtiar’s commercial practice involves a broad spectrum of commercial law and large parts overlap with employment disputes particularly restraint of trade and confidential information.

He has experience of a number of director/shareholder disputes involving allegations of fraud; dishonest assistance; unfair prejudice; and breach of fiduciary duties. 

Mukhtiar undertakes some traditional Chancery work for existing clients, including contested probate; trust of land; and commercial and residential landlord/tenant disputes.

NOTABLE CASES

• Represented two Claimants in a long-running dispute involving numerous allegations regarding breach of covenants, which resulted in contempt proceedings being brought due to an alleged breach of an injunction. Following a 17-hour mediation, settlement was reached for just under £1million for the Claimants (2025).

• Advising one of the UK’s largest construction worker suppliers in relation to a decision of the Construction Industry Training Board to reclaim circa £1.2 million of grant payments (2025). 

• Advising a high-profile sports PR and market company in relation to the termination of one of its executives following concerns about competitive trade and misuse of confidential client information (2025).

• Advising two ex-employees of a well known online review platform on allegations of breach of confidentiality, which came to light during litigation brought by the ex-employees in the employment tribunal (2025).

• Advising on an alleged breach of loan claim valued at circa £320,000. This includes whether there was an intention to create legal relations (2024).

• Advised on behalf of a company specialising in scientific design innovation regarding the enforceability of restrictive covenants and injunctive relief (2022).

• Represented a vulnerable claimant in a breach of contract claim brought against a builder who undertook a number of projects at her property, without completing any and yet continued demanding payments. The Claimant obtained an order of over £65,000 plus indemnity costs (Central London County Court 2022).

• Represented a Claimant company regarding non-payment of transport services. The matter was settled on the doors of the court (2022).

• Acted on behalf of one of the hundreds of vulnerable (new to the UK) victims of mis-sold mortgages by Dharam Prakash Gopee (through his various companies including Barons Bridge Finance). An order was obtained removing the charge on the Claimant’s property on various grounds, which included that the mortgage was provided by an unauthorised lender under section 40 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and were not enforceable without OFT approval or order of the court (Central London County Court 2021). Mukhtiar has acted in similar cases in the past, instructed by DSD law in Kent. News coverage about the prosecution brought against Mr Gopee can be found here and details of a confiscation order totalling £5million here (2022).

• Represented professional landlords in a dispute against their service company and insurer following significant damage and loss (circa £300,00) caused by a burst pipe (2021).

• Acted on behalf of a vulnerable individual who had loaned circa £400,000 to two individuals who subsequently denied the existence of the loans and one defendant denied agency making counter-allegations including fraud. The client successfully recovered the capital sum, interest and costs following settlement on the first day of a trial conducted by Zoom (2020).

• Without notice injunction (settled on the return date). Successfully restrained the winding up of a small football club where there was a genuine dispute over the alleged debt for development work carried out at the ground. The defence included an alleged non-disclosed conflict of interest in the construction company by the club’s former finance director.

Mukhtiar accepts instructions for professional discipline cases and applies his robust advocacy skills to his practical awareness. He has a good understanding of the Senior Managers and Certification Regime as employment cases involving the financial services sector often have a regulatory aspect. He has written a number of articles and provided training on non-financial misconduct in the financial services sector.

NOTABLE CASES

• Mukhtiar represented a teacher in an appeal against the decision by an examinations regulator (the AQA) to suspend a teacher for improper assistance to students.

• He has been instructed via Direct Public Access and by the Royal College of Nursing to represent nurses including being instructed for lengthy hearings involving allegation of dishonesty.

• He has appeared in a number of hearings before the General Optical Council and he has experience of an appeal to the High Court against a decision of the General Optical Council.

• Mukhtiar defended a practitioner in suitability proceedings brought by NHS England. The practitioner faced serious probity allegations, akin to fraud. The proceedings raised legal issues regarding the interpretation of the National Health Service (Performers Lists) Regulations 2013; and the legal effect of breaches of the removal procedures.

• He represented a police officer in a four-day hearing, in which the officer faced allegations of racism and sexism. A key issue was which Home Office guidance was applicable.

Mukhtiar’s father came to the UK in the 1950s and worked as a labourer in London until retirement age. Mukhtiar had various part-time jobs during primary and secondary education and then enjoyed nearly 25 years’ full-time employment in the public sector since leaving school aged 16.  

Prior to successfully completing pupillage in October 2013, Mukhtiar completed his Law degree and Bar qualifications whilst working full-time and starting a family. He started practising in a wide range of areas before specialising.

He applies his inherited work ethic and experience to work tirelessly and pragmatically to obtain the best results for his clients.

Mukhtiar has a particular interest in social mobility at the Bar and has set up the Guru Nanak Social Mobility Scholarship scheme. He is a Social Mobility Advocate, as part of the Bar Council’s “#IamtheBar” Social Mobility campaign

Learn more about Mukhtiar Singh, including his journey to the Bar and his social mobility work:

• A new face at Doughty Street Chambers | Legal Brief (legal-brief.co.uk) (2022)

• Not All Lawyers Have Law Degrees: Mukhtiar Singh: Taking a risk with someone who’s different on Apple Podcasts (2021)

• The Lawyer Portal - Case Study: University of Law, Mukhtiar Singh

• The Bar Council - Spotlight on Mukhtiar Singh, Social Mobility Advocate

• The Sikh Way - Launch of £4000 Guru Nanak social mobility scholarship

• New Law Journal - Guru Nanak Scholarship launched

• Sikh Siyasat News - Sikh Education Council and Barrister Mukhtiar Singh Awards £4,000 'Guru Nanak Social Mobility Scholarship'

• Mukhtiar Singh on Twitter promoting Guru Nanak Social Mobility Scholarships

• The Honourable Society of Lincoln's Inn - Facebook post promoting Guru Nanak Social Mobility Scholarships

• Counsel Magazine - Extraordinary Working Lives: Mukhtiar Singh

• Counsel Magazine - First Guru Nanak award

• Mukhtiar Singh and Danielle Manson of Garden Court talk diversity on BBC Radio 4 Law in Action (12 June 2019)

• Not All Lawyers Have Law Degrees: Mukhtiar Singh: Taking a risk with someone who’s different on Apple Podcasts