The Law Society is considering whether to enforce a £137,000 costs order payable in 28 days against Law Society council member and former Vice-President Kamlesh Bahl this week as the Court of Appeal upheld an earlier Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) decision that it did not discriminate against her.

The Court of Appeal supported the EAT's ruling that Ms Bahl had not been subject to race and sex discrimination by the Law Society, former Law Society President Robert Sayer, or former secretary-general Jane Betts.


It ordered Ms Bahl - who has already spent £500,000 on litigation against the Law Society - to pay £90,000 in costs to the Society and £47,500 to Mr Sayer and Ms Betts, with the balance of costs to be assessed.


A statement issued by Ms Bahl said: 'Dr Bahl is disappointed that the Law Society, Mr Sayer and Mrs Betts pressed the court to make an order for half their costs to be paid within 28 days. This was despite Dr Bahl informing the court that she was unemployed, had suffered bouts of severe ill-health over the last four-and-a-half years including hospitalisation for severe depression and could not raise such a large sum in that short time... All the legal costs of Mr Sayer and Ms Betts have been paid for by the Law Society.'


Ms Bahl's solicitor, Shahid Dastgir Khan, partner at Khans in Ilford, said: 'I hope that the Law Society will not enforce the costs order as Dr Bahl has clearly fought the case bravely in the wider interests of the profession and the public.'


A Law Society spokesman said: 'The court's decision has entirely vindicated the Society's position. The Society is pleased with this outcome and now wishes to draw a line under these matters.'


A second action launched by Ms Bahl in May 2003 against the Law Society's main board, chief executive Janet Paraskeva and former president Michael Mathews is currently scheduled for a directions hearing at an employment tribunal later in the year.


Mr Sayer and Ms Betts declined to comment.