Mrs A Glenn v Lakeside Healthcare — 2025

This was a preliminary hearing to determine whether the parties had reached a binding settlement of the claim through an ACAS COT3 agreement dated 13 December 2024. The claimant, self-representing, argued that there was no binding agreement because Mr Robinson, who had been communicating with ACAS on her behalf, lacked authority to settle, that there was ambiguity in the discussions, and that ACAS had exerted undue pressure. The respondent argued that Mr Robinson acted with ostensible authority and that a binding oral agreement to settle for £3,500 had been concluded.

Applying Gilbert v Kembridge Fibres Ltd, Gloystarne & Co Ltd v Martin, Freeman v Sovereign Chicken Ltd and Giwa v JHFX Ltd, the Employment Judge found that the claimant had held Mr Robinson out to ACAS as her representative, giving him ostensible authority to negotiate and conclude a settlement. The judge accepted the evidence that Mr Robinson told the ACAS conciliator the claimant agreed to settle for £3,500, and that the requirements of contract formation were satisfied.

On the question of whether the agreement should be set aside, the judge applied Moore v Duport Furniture Products Ltd and Slack v Greenham (Plant Hire) Ltd and found no cogent evidence of coercion or undue influence by ACAS. The judge concluded that there was a binding COT3 settlement and that the claim had been compromised; the claimant's rights are now under that agreement.