• news-banner

    Expert Insights

Unknown future claims cannot be settled

min read

The EAT has confirmed in Bathgate v Technip that provisions in the Equality Act 2010 mean that unknown future claims cannot be compromised in a settlement agreement. 

In January 2017, Mr Bathgate entered into a voluntary redundancy agreement which provided for enhanced redundancy, notice payments and an additional pension payment to be calculated by reference to a maritime collective agreement.  He signed a settlement agreement in full and final settlement of claims.  The agreement included a list of claims including age discrimination and a general waiver of all claims: past, present or future.   Three months later his employer concluded that under the terms of the collective agreement, as he was over 61 at time of dismissal, he was not entitled to the pension payment.  He was informed of this in June 2017, six months after he had signed his settlement agreement.  He brought a claim of age discrimination and his employer argued that he was precluded from bringing this claim because of the terms of the settlement agreement. 

The EAT held that to validly settle a claim under the Equality Act it must relate to the “particular complaint” which had to be identified in the agreement either by a generic description or by reference to the statutory provision giving rise to the claim.  However, a “particular complaint” did not include a complaint that may or may not occur at some point in the future.  In reaching this decision, the EAT took into account case law and an excerpt from Hansard which showed that the equivalent provision in the Employment Rights Act 1996 was intended only to be available in the context of a complaint that had already arisen. There was a public policy concern about the employer’s construction that future claims could be covered which would allow employees to sign away their rights without a proper understanding of what they were doing.  To decide otherwise would mean that Mr Bathgate had signed away his right to sue for age discrimination before he knew whether he had a claim. 

Practical considerations

This decision shows the importance of ensuring that the “particular complaint” is identified in any settlement agreement and confirms that it is not possible to settle future claims that are unknown at the time of signing whatever wording is included.

Employers should also ensure that the quantum of any compensation paid to the employee reflects the nature of the particular complaint(s) only, given that only the particular complaint(s) are being settled.

Our thinking

  • HR Breakfast Club: The Employment Rights Act 2025: In Discussion with Matthew Taylor CBE, Chair of the new Fair Work Agency

    Nick Hurley

    Events

    min read
  • The UK’s Expanded Bereavement Leave Rights

    Emily Chalkley

    Insights

    min read
  • Unfair dismissal: What Private Client employers need to know before 1 January 2027

    Chiara Muston

    Insights

    min read
  • Employment Rights Act 2025 – What’s Coming into Force in October 2026?

    Murron McKeiver

    Insights

    min read
  • The Right to Work expansion – why employment status matters more than ever

    Katherine Dennis

    Insights

    min read
  • Right to Work Reforms Webinar: What you need to do now to manage workforce compliance risk

    Kelvin Tanner

    Events

    min read
  • Costs in DIFC Employment Cases: Two New Decisions Confirm the Strength of Practice Direction 1/2025

    Peter Smith

    Quick Reads

    min read
  • Court of Appeal case highlights the importance of properly drafted repayment provisions

    Francesca Charlton

    Quick Reads

    min read
  • Safe Spaces, Serious Duties: Upcoming Changes for Employers Tackling Workplace Harassment

    Chiara Muston

    Quick Reads

    min read
  • What Moneybox Tells Us About Price Discovery on PISCES

    Greg Stonefield

    Quick Reads

    min read
  • Employer of Record Arrangements: Opportunities, Risks and What Employers Need to Know

    Razia Begum

    Insights

    min read
  • Nick Hurley writes in The Times about employers’ legal obligations during heatwaves

    Nick Hurley

    In the Press

    min read
  • Chiara Muston comments in Employee Benefits on minimum wage enforcement changes

    Chiara Muston

    In the Press

    min read
  • Ben Smith writes in Employee Benefits about how debate over statutory menstrual leave could impact workplace policy

    Ben Smith

    In the Press

    min read
  • The Final Countdown: Practical Steps for Employers Ahead of January 2027

    Francesca Charlton

    Quick Reads

    min read
  • Charles Russell Speechlys advises long standing client SPS on its acquisition of Cleardata

    Hamish Perry

    News

    min read
  • Right to work changes: what they mean for Living Sector operators

    Emily McPartland

    Quick Reads

    min read
  • After You Leave: Navigating Non-Competes and Non-Solicitation Under Swiss Law

    Remo Wagner

    Quick Reads

    min read
  • ITV News interviews Ben Smith about a parliamentary debate around statutory menstrual leave

    Ben Smith

    In the Press

    min read
  • Chiara Muston comments in People Management on 'empty time' and the gig economy

    Chiara Muston

    In the Press

    min read
Back to top