Mukhtiar has over 20 years’ experience working for various public bodies. He has enjoyed a successful career in employment relations; debt recovery; and law enforcement, including working for three years in the employment and civil litigation department of the Serious Organised Crime Agency.
Prior to successfully completing pupillage in October 2013, Mukhtiar completed his Law degree and Bar qualifications whilst working full-time. He enjoys a wide-ranging practice with a strong client base in London and Kent. He accepts direct public access instructions.
Mukhtiar is in a somewhat rare position of having established his practice almost entirely through recommendations. He is known for his determination to obtain the best outcome for his clients, reassuring manner and pragmatic outlook.
Mukhtiar has a particular interest in social mobility at the Bar and has set up a Bar Scholarship scheme to assist those from disadvantaged backgrounds. For more details visit his website. He also featured in the Bar Council’s “I am the Bar” Social Mobility campaign which was launched in 2018. For more details on this click here.
Mukhtiar is qualified to accept instructions direct from clients under the Bar Council’s Public Access Scheme. This means that members of the public who seek specialist advice can come direct to him. In addition, he welcomes instructions from solicitors, in-house law departments, qualified foreign lawyers, and clients licensed by the Bar Council to give instructions direct to barristers under the Bar Council’s Licensed Access Scheme.
For further information please contact our clerks.
Mukhtiar is recommended in the Chambers UK Bar Guide 2018 for his employment work. His previous experience in employment relations both for the employer and employee enables him to provide sound advice and practical solutions.
Mukhtiar is regularly instructed by employers and employees for cases in the Employment Tribunal, High Court and County Court. He has a depth of knowledge in all areas of employment law; substantial practical experience in workforce relations; and an ability to assimilate fact-heavy cases. Many of his cases involve city workers or the public sector, particularly healthcare providers. He has a particular interest in unfair dismissal claims involving whistleblowing; and discrimination claims relating to non-visible disabilities.
He is often instructed in cases that overlap with his civil practice, including breach of confidentiality; restraint of trade; partnership disputes; property rights; data protection; health and safety; and wages claims. Mukhtiar provides training on all aspects of employment law.
- Industrial Law Society
- Employment Law Bar Association
- Employment Lawyers Association
- Discrimination Law Association
- Society of Asian Lawyers
- A fact-heavy 6-day unfair and wrongful dismissal case. Acted on behalf of the Respondent where an ex-director made numerous allegations including bullying and being singled out for redundancy. All allegations were dismissed.
- Unfair/wrongful dismissal dispute involving a city trader. The central issue was the culture of the (well-known investment) bank at the time, including the prevalence of the alleged misconduct. The case involved a consideration of how a settlement, including a reference, could be achieved in light of the Senior Managers Regime.
- A 3-day county court case for unpaid pay with counterclaims for fraud and breach of posttermination restrictive covenants. Having been instructed for 2 years on a direct public access basis, successfully settled on the first day of trial securing the full value of the claim and costs.
- 4-day unfair dismissal case brought by a director-employee involving allegations of financial irregularity and a breach of fiduciary duties.
- In the High Court, successfully applied for injunctive relief, including a springboard injunction, against former employees and rival companies. Thereafter successfully negotiated a settlement in favour of the client company whereby its complete loss was recovered.
- Acted for a solicitor’s firm employer in a wrongful dismissal claim brought by a director employee dismissed for alleged gross negligence.
- A county court claim for a director’s payment in lieu of notice which had been withheld after the employer alleged to have subsequently discovered breaches of fiduciary duties.
- 4-day disability discrimination case involving harassment because the employee had a hearing impairment.
- 3-day claim including age discrimination, detriment, unfair dismissal and holiday pay. Successfully argued that a rolled up holiday pay clause was a sham.
- Successfully negotiated at remedies stage a six-figure settlement for a Claimant who had established that her employer had subjected her to victimisation and race discrimination.
- A county court claim involving the recoverability of finder’s fees and an allegation of breach of post-termination restrictions.
- An equal pay case, including sex and pregnancy discrimination, involving bonus schemes in the City. A substantial settlement was obtained on behalf of my client.
- A whistleblowing case involving a senior manager brought against a leading investment bank.
- 8-day whistleblowing and unfair dismissal claim, where a key issue was the meaning of “in the public interest” as inserted by s.17 of the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act.
- Unfair dismissal and unpaid holiday case. Successfully argued that a construction worker under a written “self-employed” contract was an employee.
Regulatory & Professional Discipline
A substantial part of Mukhtiar’s civil practice involves a broad spectrum of commercial law: contract (particularly building and construction disputes); insolvency; professional negligence; and company and partnership law. Large parts of his civil practice overlap with employment disputes, particularly restraint of trade, confidential information and director/shareholder disputes.
Mukhtiar has recently appeared in the Companies Court to restrain winding up proceedings and bankruptcy. He acts for both petitioners and debtors. He is currently instructed in a number of director/shareholder disputes involving allegations of fraud; dishonest assistance; unfair prejudice; and breach of fiduciary duties.
Mukhtiar maintains a private client practice for existing clients which includes traditional Chancery work.
- Re M: without notice injunction (settled on the return date) successfully restraining 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 nondisclosed conflict of interest in the construction company by the club’s former finance director.
- H v S: an extended fast-track trial regarding unpaid private school fees. The case involved the applicability of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and counterclaims regarding the school’s representations and performance.
- C v B  EWHC 3567 (QB): appeal against the striking out, on limitation grounds, of a counterclaim to a possession claim for knowing assistance to a breach of trust involving secured loans used to invest in a Ponzi scheme. Mr Justice Mitting stated, “She is now represented on a Direct Access basis by Mr Mukhtiar Singh who has presented her case with moderation and realism. I am grateful to him, as she should be as well”.
- EE v HF & 2 other companies: claim on behalf of a specialist environmental clearance company who undertook work as part of the development of a petrol station to residential properties. The Defendants ran defences involving privity and agency, but ultimately conceded on the day of trial.
- V v A: acted on behalf of the Defendant denying the existence of a number of loans; the Claimant withdrew his claim at the end of the first day of trial.
- D v H: on the day of trial, successfully negotiated settlement in a claim under s.14 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979, for rescission and damages involving the purchase of a defective vehicle.
- Bowie v Bowie: 4-day multi-track trial involving an alleged loan of £200,000 to a sibling; successfully defended the case and obtained costs on an indemnity basis.
- T v S: 4-day multi-track trial involving claims and counterclaims for breach of contract and unjust enrichment, where the dispute was over the completion of renovation works and a failure to execute a commercial lease.
- G v V: 2-day multi-track trial involving a substantial loan and a counterclaim for breach of a partnership agreement, which thereafter resulted in protracted enforcement proceedings.
- Murray v Adams & Adams: successfully obtained summary judgment on behalf of the Claimant in a dispute against guarantor Defendants concerning a failed overseas investment.
- Parking Eye v Barnett: successful application, with costs, to set aside default judgment entered for breach of contract. Argued implied terms could be incorporated thus the Defendant had a real prospect of defending the claim.
- B v H: 3-day fast track trial involving a claim for misrepresentation, breach of contract and non-acceptance under the Sale of Goods Act 1979.
Regulatory & Professional Discipline
Mukhtiar is regularly instructed for professional discipline cases and he applies his robust advocacy skills to his practical awareness.
- Association of Regulatory & Disciplinary Lawyers
Regulatory & Professional Discipline 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 is regularly instructed via Direct Public Access or by the Royal College of Nursing to represent nurses and is often instructed for lengthy hearings involving allegation of dishonesty.
- He has appeared in a number of hearings before the General Optical Council. 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 a number of 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, where the officer faced allegations of racism and sexism. A key issue was which Home Office guidance was applicable.
How to get in touch
For more information please contact our clerks by calling +44 (0) 20 7242 3555 or by email.
Mukhtiar is committed to protecting and respecting the privacy of individuals. In order to provide legal services, including advice and representation services, Mukhtiar needs to process personal data. This will include client’s personal data and the personal data of others who feature in the course of any matter upon which he is instructed.
Please click here to see how Mukhtiar will, absent any other arrangement with those instructing him, fulfil any Joint Controller responsibilities he may have under relevant data protection legislation.