EAT Lindsay P J said: ‘We have before us the appeal of Mr John Sutherland in the matter Sutherland v. two respondents, Network Appliance Ltd and Network Appliance Inc. Ms McManus appears for the appellant and Mr Napier for both respondents. Although Ms McManus has a secondary and alternative argument, the appeal chiefly raises this question: where, in existing proceedings for both statutory and contractual claims, there is a compromise not complying with section 203 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 but nonetheless expressed as being in full and final settlement of any claim the appellant may have, (without there having been any reference to severability and without, also, the compromise being in any conveniently severable form), does section 203 make void the whole compromise or does it avoid only so much of the overall compromise as would offend section 203?’
Judges:
Lindsay P J
Citations:
[2001] IRLR 12, [2000] UKEAT 1391 – 99 – 1505
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.451301
