Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Age discriminationCase lawLatest NewsEmployment tribunalsSettlement agreements

Settlement agreements cannot void future discrimination claims, EAT rules

by Ashleigh Webber 24 Oct 2022
by Ashleigh Webber 24 Oct 2022 A settlement agreement cannot void a discrimination claim that has not yet been made, the Employment Appeal Tribunal has said
Shutterstock
A settlement agreement cannot void a discrimination claim that has not yet been made, the Employment Appeal Tribunal has said
Shutterstock

A settlement agreement cannot compromise a discrimination claim that has not yet been made, the Employment Appeal Tribunal has ruled.

The claimant, Mr Bathgate, had been employed by ship operator Technip for almost 20 years before he was made redundant from his chief officer position in January 2017. He was 61 at the time of his redundancy.

In December 2016 or January 2017, the company decided there was a need for redundancies at his grade. He was sent a settlement agreement that laid out the redundancy terms and he accepted them. This included an enhanced redundancy and notice payment, payable with his final salary, and an additional sum which would be paid in June 2017.

In March 2017, the company decided that the additional sum would not be paid to those aged 61 and over. This was not communicated to Bathgate until June 2017.

Bathgate claimed this amounted to age discrimination. Although the company accepted that age was the reason he was not paid the sum, it said that by signing the agreement, Bathgate had compromised his right to pursue any further claim.

Settlement agreements

Employment law changes for 2022 and beyond

Settlement agreements: Paying employees’ legal bills

However, in the EAT’s judgment handed down earlier this month, Lord Summers says: “In this case the claimant signed away his right to sue for age discrimination before he knew whether he had a claim or not. While that may be possible at common law, the [Equality] Act restricts parties’ ability to do so.

“The inclusion of a claim in a [settlement] agreement defined merely by reference to its legal character or its section number does not satisfy the language of [the Equality Act]. The words ‘the particular complaint’ suggest that Parliament anticipated the existence of an actual complaint or circumstances where the grounds for a complaint existed. I do not consider that the words ‘the particular complaint’ are apt to describe a potential future complaint.”

The company also argued that the protections against discrimination afforded under the Equality Act 2010 did not extend to the claimant in his capacity as a seafarer. Bathgate, who lived in Edinburgh, had been working on a ship that was registered in the Bahamas and operated outside UK and EEA waters, but at the time of his redundancy he was not on board the ship.

The EAT examined the wording of the Equality Act to consider whether Bathgate had a right to bring a claim. The judge considered that the claimant had worked on board the ship for most of his working life, which meant he did not cease to be a seafarer because he had not been working on a vessel towards the end of his employment.

Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance

Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday

OptOut
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The judgment says: “It does not strike me as strange that a person who would not have been able to claim during his or her employment because their work was outside UK and EEA waters and on board a foreign flagged ship should be unable to claim for an act of discrimination that would not have been justiciable during employment. On the contrary it would be a consistent approach. Whether Parliament would consider it a desirable state of affairs is another matter. To give the claimant a right after employment he did not have during employment would require a rewording of the statute.”

Latest HR job opportunities on Personnel Today


Browse more human resources jobs

Ashleigh Webber

Ashleigh is a former editor of OHW+ and former HR and wellbeing editor at Personnel Today. Ashleigh's areas of interest include employee health and wellbeing, equality and inclusion and skills development. She has hosted many webinars for Personnel Today, on topics including employee retention, financial wellbeing and menopause support.

previous post
NHS England launches new nurse recruitment drive
next post
Report recommends office space ‘sweet spot’ for productivity

You may also like

London Tube drivers vote for TfL’s four-day week...

11 Apr 2025

Officer fairly dismissed for not disclosing previous sacking...

11 Feb 2025

Three in five tribunal claims settled before final...

11 Feb 2025

Non-disclosure agreements have ‘devastating impacts’ on people

1 Mar 2024

CBI reaches legal settlement with Tony Danker

5 Feb 2024

Settlement agreements can cover future legal claims, court...

10 Jan 2024

Top 10 HR questions October 2023: holiday entitlement

2 Nov 2023

Protected conversations: pros and cons in the redundancy...

24 Jul 2023

Top 10 HR questions March 2023: Third-party harassment

4 Apr 2023

Employment law changes for 2022 and beyond: update...

1 Jul 2022

  • 2025 Employee Communications Report PROMOTED | HR and leadership...Read more
  • The Majority of Employees Have Their Eyes on Their Next Move PROMOTED | A staggering 65%...Read more
  • Prioritising performance management: Strategies for success (webinar) WEBINAR | In today’s fast-paced...Read more
  • Self-Leadership: The Key to Successful Organisations PROMOTED | Eletive is helping businesses...Read more
  • Retaining Female Talent: Four Ways to Reduce Workplace Drop Out PROMOTED | International Women’s Day...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2025

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2025 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+