Blog Layout

What does 'Without Prejudice' Mean? Settlement Agreement Law


What does 'Without Prejudice' Mean?

What does ‘Without Prejudice’ and ‘Subject to Contract’ mean?


In this article, we examine what the phrases 'without prejudice' and 'subject to contract' mean in the context of a settlement agreement, sometimes referred to as ‘exit agreements’, ‘compromise agreements’, or ‘termination agreements’, under Irish employment law.


The main legal impact of a settlement agreement is that it will prevent an employee from bringing any future claim against the employer.


The consequences of such an agreement cannot be overstated, particularly if there is or was a dispute between the parties. 


Although a settlement agreement, is often intended to finalize any employment law dispute between the parties, an employee may also be waiving any other right they have, to bring any legal claim, against their employer. 

The execution of a settlement agreement often comes down to a simple risk assessment and cost-benefit analysis.


For the employer, he or she will be looking at the likelihood of a case being taken against him, the chances of success, and a calculation of a potential award if the claim is successful. To insulate themselves from that risk, they may offer more favourable terms to the departing employee, in return for their agreeing not to pursue any claim or litigation against the employer.


For the employee, he or she may have a legitimate claim against the employer, however, there is never any guarantee of success, when one initiates a workplace claim, particularly before the Workplace Relations Commission. Therefore, he or she may also undertake their own risk analysis and cost-benefit assessment, to determine their own likelihood of success, in bringing a claim, the potential costs involved, as well as the likelihood of an award.


'Without Prejudice' - Making an Offer Private


When a settlement agreement is often put before an employee, it is on the basis that, should the employee refuse to accept it, he or she will be precluded from relying on that proposal, in any form, in any future litigation. 


By marking the document has being ‘without prejudice’ and ‘subject to contract’, an employer prevents the proposal from having any legal standing, until such time as it is executed by both parties, thereby affording both parties, an opportunity to freely negotiate the terms of the agreement, without fear that their respective positions, can be used against him, if any dispute between them, isn’t settled throughout the negotiation process.


Until such time as the agreement is signed by both the employer and employee, it has no legal standing.


Advice on Settlement Agreements


Any employee considering executing a settlement agreement, needs clear and concise advice on the potential consequences of signing such an agreement. In order for them to be fully appraised, they need to know what their potential legal rights are. For that reason, we always advise, that employees obtain their independent legal advice, from a specialist employment solicitor, who is fully aware of all of the potential actions that an employee may take. 


Employee should know what potential complaints they may be in a position to raise, the likelihood of success, the cost of bringing such a claim, and the potential awards. It is only through an understanding of what the alternatives to a settlement agreement are, that an employee can be considered to be fully informed as to the consequences of signing that agreement and waiving their employment rights.

Please click HERE for a downloadable 'Guide to Settlement Agreements under Irish Employment Law'.



Share

Remote  work laws in Ireland
by RG343171 16 August 2024
The case of Aline Karabko v TikTok Technology Ltd (ADJ-00051600) examines the obligations employers have, under Irish law, when a request for remote work is made by an employee. As the law in Ireland currently stands, there is no right to remote work per se. This may be overcome when an individual has been guaranteed remote work in their contract of employment or remote work has been determined to constitute a reasonable accommodation in accordance with relevant employment legislation, where applicable. However, none of these exceptions applied in the present case.
Section 18 of the Parental Leave Act
9 August 2024
The case of Dean Hart v Komfort Kare (ADJ00051923) examines the circumstances under which a request for time off, by a parent, from their employer, must be given due consideration. Dean Hart (the Complainant) brought a complaint under Section 18 of the Parental Leave Act 1998 against Komfort Kare (the Respondent) to the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC), alleging that they denied him the right to take force majeure despite extenuating circumstances.
Constructive Dismissal and Sexual Harassment
31 July 2024
The case of Care Worker v Costern Unlimited Company (ADJ00046268) examines the circumstances under which it will be deemed reasonable for an employee to resign and bring a claim of unfair dismissal by way of constructive dismissal on foot of a failure of their employer to properly investigate their complaints.
Payment of notice pay after probation
6 June 2024
The case of Eric Bentley v Carcharger EV Limited (ADJ00050468) examines the circumstances under which an employee will be entitled to a payment in lieu of notice if dismissed during their probationary period. This is a very interesting case, as it was brought under the payment of wages provisions, but decided upon under notice legislation.
Interview discrimination
5 June 2024
The case of A Job Applicant v A Public Body (ADJ00049321) examines the burden of proof in discrimination claims, particularly when discrimination is being claimed at the interview stage.
The Burden of Proof in Constructive Dismissal Claims in Ireland
3 June 2024
The case of Mark Lowry v JJ Fleming and Company Limited (ADJ00036677) examines the burden of proof issues that often arise in constructive dismissal claims. Uniquely, the employer offered no substantive evidence to support their case, yet won, highlighting the very difficult hurdles an employee often faces in bringing an unfair dismissal claim following their resignation.
Show More
Share by: