Acas early conciliation
Chris Cook is partner and Keely Rushmore senior associate at SA Law. They round up the latest rulings.
Chris Cook is partner and head of employment and Keely Rushmore is senior associate at SA Law. They round up the latest rulings.
Beth Staniland is a trainee solicitor, and Emma Cousins, Ciara Jenkins, Iain Naylor and Lucy Sorell are associates at Addleshaw Goddard LLP. They round up the latest rulings.
Amanda Steadman is a professional support lawyer, Iain Naylor, Lucy Sorell and Rachael Wake are associates, and Jessica-Alice Curtis is a trainee solicitor at Addleshaw Goddard LLP. They round up the latest rulings.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that a tribunal was right to reject a claim where the claimant had not contacted Acas under the early conciliation procedure. While the claimant's reluctance to initiate the procedure was understandable, given that the claim involved allegations of sexual harassment, the claimant did not fall within any of the statutory exemptions.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has refused to allow a claim to proceed where it was submitted shortly before the time limit ran out, but rejected because of an incorrect early conciliation number being entered on the ET1. The claim was resubmitted, but outside the time limit.
The employment tribunal in this case took the unusual decision that the employer victimised the claimant when it allowed an Acas conciliation officer to forward her an email questioning her abilities and suggesting that she would never be promoted because of weaknesses in her literacy skills.
In Clarke and others v Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council; Wilson and others v Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council  IRLR 324 EAT, the Employment Appeal Tribunal holds that there is no duty on an Acas conciliation officer to advise on the merits of a claim before the employee enters into a binding settlement via a COT3 agreement.
Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to Acas early conciliation.
XpertHR® is part of the LexisNexis® Risk Solutions portfolio of brands.
The materials and information included in the XpertHR service are provided for reference purposes only. They are not intended either as a substitute for professional advice or judgment or to provide legal or other advice with respect to particular circumstances. Use of the service is subject to our terms and conditions.
Copyright © 2023 LexisNexis Risk Solutions
© 2023 LexisNexis Risk Solutions.