I guess my question is partly rhetorical, in so much as an agreement was drawn up just between the parties.
However this was drawn up by the claimants solicitor and we were advised it would be an acas cot 3 agreement, indeed it is presented as a cot 3 agreement, and the text refers to it being a cot 3 agreement.
But they withdrew the ET claim, before getting acas involved, who then couldn't process it as a cot 3.
I refused to pay on the basis that the agreement clearly states:
payment will be made within 14 days of receipt of form cot 3, duly signed etc.
I felt this might leave us open to further claims and they had not complied with the terms of the agreement.
However the claimants solicitor has repeatedly claimed that this agreement is legally binding and we are in breach of contract, despite the above.
Hope this helps clarify
thanks for your help
Hi just checking if you need any more information
There are two types of claim that an employee can have against their employer - contractual or statutory.
If you are trying to waive contractual claims alone, then this can be done by entering into a contractual agreement with the other party. However, in order to try and waive statutory claims you may only do so legally by entering into a COT3 agreement or a compromise agreement.
If you are making a sex discrimination claim then that would be a statutory claim and it would need to be settled via a COT3 or a CA.
So if this agreement was used to settle statutory claims, it would not be valid but if it was used to settle contractual claims then it can be. In this case if this was intended to be a COT3 but it never ended up as such it could make the whole agreement void and neither party would be contractually obliged to the other. This could then become a potential negligence claim on the part of the solicitor who withdrew the claim before the agreement was officially ratified by ACAS.
I thought there was something like this about statutory rights but couldn't find it,
if you have any references I could refer to, just to confirm this that would be brilliant
There is no one source for this and each piece of legislation would contain its own restrictions on the ability to contract out of claims under it. For example, section 203(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 states that a provision in any agreement is void in so far as it purports to exclude or limit any provision in the Act. For the Equality Act it is section 144(1)
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).