Legal News

Did a settlement agreement preclude an application to strike out a second claim? (Farnham-Oliver v RM Educational Resources Ltd)

Published on: 23 September 2021
Published by: LexisPSL
  • Did a settlement agreement preclude an application to strike out a second claim? (Farnham-Oliver v RM Educational Resources Ltd)
  • What are the practical implications of this case?
  • What was the background?
  • What did the court decide?
  • Case details

Article summary

Dispute Resolution analysis: An employee brought claims before the Employment Tribunal. The claims alleged disability discrimination. The complaints had been heralded by an internal grievance which (among other things) complained of the employee having suffered work-related stress. The Tribunal claim was settled by an ACAS COT3 form which included terms for the payment of a lump sum to the employee and for the termination of his employment. The terms expressly provided that the employee would not be prevented from bringing a personal injury claim for damages for personal injury as a result of work-related stress. When the employee brought the personal injury claim the employer sought to strike out the claim on the basis that it was an abuse of the process. Master Dagnall rejected their application, concluding that the terms of the settlement prevented the employer applying to strike out on this basis and that, applying a broad merits-based approach, there was no abuse of process. Written by David Reade QC and James Wynne, barristers at Littleton Chambers. or take a trial to read the full analysis.

Popular documents