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, insofar as it requires disputes to be finally resolved by arbitration and thereby precludes or limits the continuation of statutory claims before the Employment Tribunal, is void and unenforceable under s.203 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and s.144 of the Equality Act 2010. The High Court has no jurisdiction to order a stay of Employment Tribunal proceedings or to compel the Defendant to apply for or consent to such a stay. The proper forum for such an application is the Employment Tribunal itself.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 668
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 and Application for Mandatory Injunction / Judgment on Application for Mandatory Injunction and Claim
Outcome
Claim and application dismissed
Legal Topics
Enforceability of Arbitration Clauses in Employment Contracts, Jurisdiction of Employment Tribunal, Contracting Out of Statutory Employment Rights, Mandatory Injunctions, Dispute Resolution Procedures in LLP Agreements
Employment Law Contract Law Arbitration Enforceability of Arbitration Clauses in Employment Contracts Jurisdiction of Employment Tribunal Contracting Out of Statutory Employment Rights Mandatory Injunctions Dispute Resolution Procedures in LLP Agreements

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 3 Authorities cited 12 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 and Application for Mandatory Injunction / Judgment on Application for Mandatory Injunction and Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Clause 41 of the Members Agreement, requiring disputes to be resolved by ADR and potentially arbitration, is enforceable to stay Employment Tribunal proceedings for discrimination and whistleblowing claims
  2. 2 Whether the High Court can grant a mandatory injunction requiring the Defendant to apply for or consent to a stay of Employment Tribunal proceedings
  3. 3 Whether such contractual provisions are void or unenforceable under Equality Act 2010 s.144 and Employment Rights Act 1996 s.203

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 41 of the Members Agreement, insofar as it requires disputes to be finally resolved by arbitration and thereby precludes or limits the continuation of statutory claims before the Employment Tribunal, is void and unenforceable under s.203 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and s.144 of the Equality Act 2010. The High Court has no jurisdiction to order a stay of Employment Tribunal proceedings or to compel the Defendant to apply for or consent to such a stay. The proper forum for such an application is the Employment Tribunal itself.

Court Disposition

Claim and application dismissed

Orders

  • Claimants' claim and application for mandatory injunction dismissed