Recent client:

“I contacted Mrs A Sheikh after I could not find a solicitor in the north who was confident or experienced enough to represent me in my Court of Appeal application. It was the best decision I could have made as Mrs Sheikh went above and beyond to assist me which led to a totally successful Appeal at the Court of Appeal.


I found Mrs Sheikh to be professional, approachable and respectful from our very first meeting all the way through to the conclusion of the hearing.


I have no hesitation in recommending Mrs Sheikh of Strand Solicitors to anyone wishing to instruct an experienced and knowledgeable employment law Solicitor.

Miss Jane Dolby - Sheffield


“I write to inform you of how pleased I was in the way that my solicitor Mrs Sheikh of Strand Solicitors handled my case. I believe that she was extremely professional, courteous and understood my case and what I was seeking from it as a result of which I believe I have succeeded in obtaining a very good out of court settlement. She was there each time I needed support and assistance as well as fighting my case to a high level without allowing it to drag on.


I would not hesitate to recommend Mrs Sheikh as a very good Employment Law solicitor to my friends and family.


I am extremely grateful to her firm Strand Solicitors as I do not believe I would have had this successful outcome without her assistance.”




Olasehinde v. Panther Securities Plc (UKEAT/0554/07) Appeal to EAT allowed where it was held that the making of false and unreasonable disciplinary accusations by the Respondent were capable of constituting a detriment for the purposes of S.4(2)(c) even though no sanctions were imposed it constituted racial discrimination within s.1(1)(a) of Race Relations Act 1976 and was unlawful: De Souza v Automobile Association [1986] ICR 514 considered.


Dr. Ambaye v. Middlesex University (UKEAT NO.0410/07) Appeal to the EAT on the grounds of Bias against an Employment Tribunal judge and against a substantial Costs Order made against my Appellant client. The Respondent consented to the Appellant’s appeal. The Respondent also agreed not to make a further application for costs against the Appellant in connection with his Employment Tribunal proceedings and agreed not to enforce the Costs Order from the Supreme Court Costs Office.


Ashley v. City Holdings [2007] (UKEAT 0129/07) The Employment Tribunal held that the employee's race discrimination claim was out of time. On appeal it was conceded that the first of the 2 bases of that claim arose out of dismissal and that, pursuant to the EAT decision in Lawrence v HM Prison Service (UKEAT/0630/06), no separate grievance was required; and time was extended pursuant to rule 16 of the Dispute Regulations. The second basis of that claim was not pursued. There had been delay and failure to comply with the EAT Orders by Peninsula; order for costs made against them for an agreed figure.