Hogan Lovells partner caned by tribunal for firing nanny

A partner at Hogan Lovells’ London office has been ordered to pay his children’s former nanny £18,000 after he fired her when she became pregnant.

Sylvain Dhennin heads Hogan Lovells’ European High Yield practice. He is described on the firm’s website as having a “humble and down to earth approach” to his work. Although possibly not to Saesi Muslipah, who worked as a nanny to his children for nine months until Dhennin unceremoniously fired her last September. Paying her just one week’s notice. Presumably Dhennin felt he couldn’t afford any more than this given that the average equity partner at Hogan Lovells only makes £968,000 a year.

Muslipah told a tribunal last week that four days before she was fired she had confided in Dhennin’s wife that she was pregnant. Dhennin said that the pregnancy was irrelevant, and that he had previously discussed with Muslipah that her position might become redundant when his children started to attend nursery. The tribunal told him where to go, finding that “at no time prior to 22 September 2017 was it ever suggested to the claimant that her role was redundant” and that “pregnancy was a material factor in that decision”. For good measure they added that Dhennin had used "deliberate, careful and sophisticated" language (well, he is a lawyer…) and also accused him of "obscuring the facts" (ah, not so good).

Dhennin was ordered to pay Muslipah £6,500 in damages and £11,866 in compensation and interest. Neither Dhennin nor Hogan Lovells would comment.

Comments

Can any explain to me the difference between “obscuring the facts” and a lack of honesty? Asking for a friend at the SRA

Very easy to answer. If you work in the provinces doing tawdry things like PI or immigration work, you're probably already inherently dishonest. However, if you're the partner of a MC firm, then at worst you might have given the impression of having failed fully to utilise absolutely all of the ingredients of straightforwardness. I trust you can appreciate the subtle yet expensive difference.

If this wasn't a legal blog, I'd have laid money on the second poster being Ron Dennis.

Heh,imagine if somewhere in SRA there is guidance along those lines.

where’s the divide though?

Is it;

Below £200/ hr hourly rate for a Partner - Presumably dishonest with dirty and chipped fingernails

Over £200/hr hourly rate for a Partner - sound as a pound, prolly also a local councilor in Hackney or Bow

Or;

LLP’s EV/ EBITDA is in single figures- completely reliable, it must have been a completely one off aberration

What’s EBITDA? £50,000 fine and strike off by default, no?

One is telling lies, the other is not telling lies while also avoiding having to tell the truth. It's an art form, and one of the things that makes a lawyer good at their job.