Clyde & Co LLP & Anor v Winkelhof [2011] EWHC 668 (QB) (22 March 2011)

Clyde & Co LLP & Anor v Winkelhof [2011] EWHC 668 (QB) (22 March 2011)

Clause 41 of the Members Agreement is void and unenforceable insofar as it requires disputes to be finally resolved by arbitration and precludes continuation of Employment Tribunal proceedings, as it contravenes Section 203 ERA and Section 144 EA. The High Court has no jurisdiction to grant a mandatory injunction requiring the Defendant to apply for or consent to a stay of Employment Tribunal proceedings. The proper forum for such an application is the Employment Tribunal itself.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 668 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Clyde & Co LLP; Claimant: John Morris; Defendant: Krista Bates van Winkelhof
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Part 8 Claim for Mandatory Injunction / Judgment on Application and Claim
Outcome
Claim and application dismissed
Legal Topics
Arbitration Clauses, Contracting Out of Statutory Rights, Employment Tribunal Jurisdiction, Sex Discrimination, Whistleblowing, Mandatory Injunctions
Employment Law Contract Law Equality Law Arbitration Clauses Contracting Out of Statutory Rights Employment Tribunal Jurisdiction Sex Discrimination Whistleblowing +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Clyde & Co LLP

Claimant

John Morris

Claimant

Krista Bates van Winkelhof

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim for Mandatory Injunction / Judgment on Application and Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Clause 41 of the Members Agreement is enforceable to require a stay of Employment Tribunal proceedings
  2. 2 Whether Clause 41 contravenes Section 203 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and Section 144 of the Equality Act 2010
  3. 3 Whether the High Court can grant a mandatory injunction requiring the Defendant to apply for or consent to a stay of Employment Tribunal proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 41 of the Members Agreement is void and unenforceable insofar as it requires disputes to be finally resolved by arbitration and precludes continuation of Employment Tribunal proceedings, as it contravenes Section 203 ERA and Section 144 EA. The High Court has no jurisdiction to grant a mandatory injunction requiring the Defendant to apply for or consent to a stay of Employment Tribunal proceedings. The proper forum for such an application is the Employment Tribunal itself.

Court Disposition

Claim and application dismissed