Mr M Shabir v P&B Kennedy Holdings Limited HELD by CVP — 2022

The tribunal heard a preliminary issue about whether a binding ACAS COT3 settlement had been reached and whether the claimant had withdrawn his claims. The claimant had originally presented unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal complaints. On 12 January 2022, after discussions involving the claimant, his solicitor, the respondent, and the ACAS officer, the claimant emailed acceptance of a £7,500 settlement and requested payment direct to his own account. The ACAS officer then sent draft COT3 terms, including a reference, and the claimant confirmed on the call that he agreed the terms.

The tribunal found that the claimant then sent an email withdrawing the claim the same evening, and that this was not a mistake. It rejected the claimant’s arguments that the settlement had been reached under duress, that ACAS had failed him, and that the tribunal’s refusal to postpone the hearing had forced his hand. The tribunal held that he had a real alternative, namely to proceed to the hearing the next day, and that the ACAS officer had acted properly in requiring confirmation that the solicitor no longer acted and in obtaining the claimant’s agreement before treating the COT3 as binding.

The tribunal also rejected the claimant’s later attempt the next morning to retract the settlement and say that the withdrawal email had been sent in error from his drafts folder. It found that the withdrawal was clear, unequivocal and unambiguous when sent, and that the claimant knew the settlement had been accepted and that the withdrawal should be sent. Applying Rule 51 and Rule 52, and noting the principles in Cole v Elders’ Voice and the limited contract grounds for setting aside an agreement, the tribunal dismissed the claims. No tribunal remedy was awarded because the case ended by withdrawal following settlement.