EQUALITY OFFICER’S DECISION No: DEC-E2015-002
PARTIES
HEALY
-v-
IRISH LIFE ASSURANCE PLC
(Represented by Eamon Murray B.L. instructed by Gillian Fitzgibbon)
File No. EE/2012/286
Date issued: 22 January, 2015
Employment Equality Acts, 1998-2011 – Section 79(3A) - jurisdiction – previous agreement settling all matters between parties
1. Background
The Claimant John Healy was employed as a Representative from 18th May 1985 to 4th May 2011. He has claimed that he has been discriminated on grounds of disability, age and marital status.
The complaint was referred under the Acts to the Director of the Equality Tribunal on 18th May 2012. In accordance with his powers under Sec 75 of the Acts, the Director delegated the case on 23rd October 2014 to me Eugene Hanly, Equality Officer, for investigation and decision. Submissions were received from both parties. As required by Sec 79(1) of the Acts a hearing was held on 28th November 2014.
In reaching a decision I have taken into account the written and oral submissions of both parties.
2. Preliminary Point – Jurisdiction
2.1 Summary of Employer’s Case
The employer is disputing this claim on the grounds that this forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the claim. In 2000 John Healy issued High Court proceedings against the employer. On 4th May 2011 the parties concluded a full and final settlement 1) “of all claims by the Plaintiff (John Healy) against Irish Life in respect of his employment and the termination of same as of 5th May 2011, and permanent health insurance.2) all claims by Irish Life against the Plaintiff in respect of his employment and the termination of same as of 5th May 2011 permanent health insurance, (which is inclusive of statutory redundancy)”.
John Healy had the benefit of legal advice on the day and he was represented by his Solicitor, Senior Council and Junior Council. He received a sum in consideration of this settlement and a contribution towards his legal costs, details supplied at the hearing. Correspondence from his Solicitor confirmed the receipt of all monies and the discontinuance of the proceedings. They cited the Supreme Court case Doran v Thompson [1978] in support of their position. He is estopped from prosecuting this claim before the Equality Tribunal. There is nothing left to litigate whether before this forum or any other forum with regard to matters relating to and arising from his employment with the employer. He is not seeking to impugn the terms of the settlement. He cannot seek to retain the benefits of the settlement agreement while ignoring the obligations placed on him by the settlement. The Equality Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain this claim.
2.2 Summary of Complainant’s Case
John Healy accepts that he took part in settlement talks that led to a full and final settlement being signed. He accepts that he received a severance payment and a contribution towards his legal costs. He accepts that he signed the form RP50.
He was unhappy with the manner of the settlement. He attended at what he was told were exploratory talks. His Solicitor, Barrister his wife and himself were in separate rooms. There was no agenda for this meeting. This was a ham-fisted approach to discussions and he was put under pressure. He was offered a guillotine approach to redundancy and as he had no income and a family to support he was pressurised into accepting. He still has issues with his former employer over the way that he was treated and he wants his allegations of discrimination investigated.
3. Findings/Conclusions of the Equality Officer on the Preliminary Point
I note that John Healy issued High Court proceedings against his employer in 2000.
I note that he attended settlement talks on 4th May 2011.
I note that he was represented by his Solicitor, Senior Council, Junior Council and his wife was in attendance.
I note that a full and final settlement was reached and he signed it.
I note that this agreement provided for the following 1) “of all claims by the Plaintiff (John Healy) against Irish Life in respect of his employment and the termination of same as of 5th May 2011, and permanent health insurance.2) all claims by Irish Life against the Plaintiff in respect of his employment and the termination of same as of 5th May 2011, (which is inclusive of statutory redundancy), permanent health insurance.
I note that he received all the monies that were provided for in this agreement.
I note from his Solicitor’s correspondence that all monies were paid and that he withdrew the High Court proceedings.
I note that he stated that he was not fully aware of exactly what was going on and that he was rushed into making a decision.
I find that he had the benefit of advice from his Solicitor and both Senior and Junior Council. I find that under the circumstances he was well aware of the full meaning of this transaction and he signed his acceptance to it.
I note that in the High Court case Sunday Newspapers Ltd v Kinsella & Bradley (2008 19 E.L.R. 53) it stated, “in the instant case, the agreement is expressly stated to be in full and final settlement and that means what it says …there was some meaningful discussion and negotiation… professional advice of an appropriate character before the agreement was signed”..
The Supreme Court in Doran v Thompson [1978] IR223 “Where one party has, by his words or conduct, made to the other a clear and unambiguous promise or assurance which was intended to affect the legal relations between them and to be acted on accordingly , and the other party has acted on it by altering his position to his detriment , it well settled that the one who gave the promise or assurance cannot afterwards be allowed to revert to their previous legal relations as if no such promise or assurance had been made by him, and the he may be restrained in equity from acting inconsistently with such promise or assurance”.
I find that “full and final “means just that, it is full and final.
I find that he cannot now ignore the obligations placed upon him by signing this agreement.
Decision of the Equality Officer
I hereby make the following decision in accordance with Sec 79(6) of the Acts.
I have decided that I do not have jurisdiction to hear this case.
Eugene Hanly
Equality Officer
22 January, 2015