Back to search
2402583/2023settled

Cheshire & Wirral Partnership NHS Foundation Trust

22 April 2024England & WalesRegional Employment Judge Franey
GOV.UK

Case Summary

Employment Judge Franey dismissed the respondent's application to strike out the claim under rule 37(1)(a) on the basis that it was an abuse of process and had no reasonable prospect of success. The case involved a Business Development Manager who resigned after negotiations for a settlement agreement, but later presented a new claim.

Key Issues

  • abuse of process
  • binding settlement agreement

Claim Types

Cited Laws and Legal Issues

Employment Rights Act 1996 section 13Employment Rights Act 1996

nds for further claims for breach of contract and unlawful deductions from wages, if the agreement is to be considered to have no effec

Employment Rights Act 1996 unfair dismissalEmployment Rights Act 1996

rder for it to be effective as a means of settling the unfair dismissal complaint. 52. I considered the secondary argument ra

Equality Act 2010 disability discriminationEquality Act 2010

unal complaints alleging different forms of disability discrimination and victimisation. 6. In November 2022 the res

Working Time Regulations 1998Working Time Regulations 1998

letter of 26 January at page 77. 39. Notice pay and holiday pay were paid to the claimant on 27 January 2023. 40. Th

Decision Text

Case No. 2402583/2023 1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Miss R Wadkin Respondent: Cheshire & Wirral Partnership NHS Foundation Trust Heard at: Manchester (by CVP) On: 19 April 2024 Before: Regional Employment Judge Franey (sitting alone) Representatives For the claimant: In person For the respondent: Mr A Gibson, Solicitor JUDGMENT The respondent’s application to strike out the claim under rule 37(1)(a) is dismissed. REASONS Introduction 1. This was a public preliminary hearing conducted by video using the HMCTS Cloud Video Platform. Its purpose was to determine an application made by the respondent to strike out the claim under rule 37(1)(a) on the basis that it was an abuse of process and/or had no reasonable prospect of success. 2. I had a bundle of documents running to 124 pages, and any reference in these Reasons to page numbers is a reference to that bundle. 3. Understandably, neither side had envisaged that any witness evidence would be called, but during discussion with Mr Gibson at the start of the hearing it became apparent that he did intend to challenge some of the facts put forward by the claimant in the bundle of documents and in her response to the application. The claimant agreed that she would give evidence and did so pursuant to an affirmation. Mr Gibson asked her questions about the relevant facts. Case No. 2402583/2023 2 4. After I heard her evidence I had an oral submission from each party before giving an oral judgment with brief oral reasons. The claimant asked for written reasons to help her process the decision and the reasons for it. Background 5. The claimant was employed as a Business Development Manager for the respondent. By the start of November 2022 she had presented three Employment Tribunal ...

Download full PDF

Employer

Respondent

Cheshire & Wirral Partnership NHS Foundation Trust

Employer page →View all cases →

Case Details

Case Number
2402583/2023
Tribunal
Employment Tribunal
Level
First instance
Decision Date
22/04/2024
Published
07/05/2024
Jurisdiction
England & Wales
Judge
Regional Employment Judge Franey