ETZ 4(WR) IN THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL (SCOTLAND) AT EDINBURGH Judgment of the Employment Tribunal in Case No: 4103573/2020 (V), Issued Following Open Preliminary Hearing Heard at Edinburgh on the Cloud Based Video Platform (CVP) on st of April 2021 at am Employment Judge J G d’Inverno Mr G McKinlay v Royal Mail Group Limited — 2019

The preliminary hearing concerned whether the claimant had title to present, and whether the tribunal had jurisdiction to consider, complaints of constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination. The respondent relied on an ACAS-facilitated COT3 agreement signed in August 2019 and, separately, on res judicata following earlier withdrawn and dismissed claims.

The tribunal found that the COT3 was reached after negotiations involving the claimant, the respondent's representative and ACAS. It accepted evidence that the ACAS conciliation officer went through the agreement clause by clause, that the claimant raised only a pension-related point, and that the respondent then amended the agreement before the claimant confirmed by email that he agreed to it. The tribunal found the agreement covered all rights and claims arising from or connected to the claimant's employment or its termination, and that the respondent had performed its obligations under it.

The claimant argued that he had not taken legal advice and did not really understand what he was signing, relying in part on bereavement and poor mental health at the time. The tribunal held that an ACAS COT3 did not require independent legal advice in the way a qualifying settlement agreement would, and found that the claimant had not proved lack of contractual capacity. It concluded that the COT3 was valid and binding, that the tribunal's jurisdiction was ousted, and separately that the claims were res judicata. Both complaints were therefore dismissed for want of jurisdiction.