Gary Matthews Solicitors

A significant decision has issued in which the High Court refused an application to dismiss a plaintiff’s personal injury claim despite the existence of a compromise agreement which expressly provided for a full and final settlement of all claims.

From Leman Solicitors:

“Had the plaintiff taken legal advice (as the agreement claims she did) then the defendant may have been entitled to rely on the waiver contained in the agreement. Absent such advice, the question arises whether the defendant was required to take proactive steps to advise its employee of the benefit of such advice and/or ensure that she did take it or if she chose not to, that she understood any compromise of her entitlements that may be included in that agreement.”

By Amy McNicholas, Leman Solicitiors, 10th February 2022

BACKGROUND

Ms Hennessy (the “Plaintiff”) was employed by Ladbrokes (Ireland) Limited (the “Defendant”) as a customer service manager from 22 April 1998 until her employment ended, due to redundancy, on 11 August 2015.

At the time, the Plaintiff signed a Compromise Agreement (the “Agreement”) which included a clause that precluded her from issuing or pursuing “any proceedings or claim of any nature whatsoever” against the Defendant.

On 6 April 2016, some eight months after signing the Agreement, the Plaintiff lodged an application with the Personal Injuries Assessment Board (PIAB). A personal injury summons subsequently issued against the Defendant claiming damages for injuries to the Plaintiff’s shoulders. The Plaintiff alleged that she was repeatedly required to engage in repetitive movements and worked in unsuitable conditions.

To read the full case study please visit:
https://thoughtleadership.leman.ie/post/102higt/employment-case-review-application-to-dismiss-personal-injury-claim-refused

An article in the latest issue of People Management Magazine casts a light on the HR and Employment law ramifications raised by plot elements of the hit film Miss Congeniality.

In the movie, agent Eric Matthews, in an attempt to identify which member of his team would be the best choice to go undercover at a beauty contest, uses his computer to simulate what his colleagues would look like in a bikini. When his coworkers gather at the computer to jeer at the results which include mock-ups of older women and senior leadership, we run into a problematic area.

They pose the question: Could this be classed as workplace bullying and discrimination? Could and should his employers have stopped this with proper training?

People Management spoke to Amo Bains, HR advisor at University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust.

“Jeering at what senior leadership and older female colleagues would look like in bikinis could potentially be classed as direct discrimination on the grounds of the protected characteristics of age and sex.”

Bains goes on to point out that, in lieu of a clearly defined policy on what constitutes bullying in the workplace, it is often characterised as “behaviour that is offensive, intimidating, malicious or insulting and is often intended to humiliate or injure the recipient.”

The lesson to be learned is this: Employers should have a clear policy and procedure in place that outlines what constitutes bullying and discrimination in the workplace and how it will be dealt with. What is banter for one person crosses the line into bullying for another and everyone deserves to work in an environment where they are respected and valued for their knowledge and skills regardless of their age, sex, or other protected characteristic.

Plans to enhance and reform the Personal Injuries Assessment Board (PIAB) in a bid to encourage more claimants and respondents to use it have been given the go-ahead by ministers.

https://www.irishlegal.com/articles/piab-to-be-enhanced-and-reformed-through-new-legislation#:~:text=Under%20the%20legislation%2C%20the%20new,identity%20on%20application%20and%20disclose

The government has approved the general scheme of the Personal Injuries Resolution Board Bill and has now given the green light to the drafting of the bill, which will change PIAB’s name to the Personal Injuries Resolution Board (PIRB).

Robert Troy, minister of state for trade promotion, digital and company regulation, said: “Insurance reform is a continued priority for government and as minister responsible for PIAB, I am committed to delivering effective and impactful reform of the PIAB model that will reduce the cost of litigation and ultimately premiums.

“We know PIAB provides a time and cost-efficient alternative to litigating personal injury claims. The proposals approved by government this week focus on enhancing the PIAB model to not only encourage more claimants and respondents to avail of its service but crucially to have their claims resolved also, thereby reducing the need to go to court.”

Under the legislation, the new PIRB will offer mediation as a means of resolving a claim; will retain claims of a wholly psychological nature; will have additional time to assess claims where an injury is yet to settle rather than releasing to litigation; will seek proof of identity on application and disclose information to An Garda Síochána to reduce fraud; and will deepen its analysis and public information roles. The court’s discretion regarding costs in litigation will be tightened.

Mr Troy said: “In developing these proposals, I met regularly with PIAB and a range of representative bodies to assess the role of PIAB itself and address how best to enhance and reform the Agency. I also closely considered the wide range of proposals submitted to the public consultation I launched last year and the suggestions raised by stakeholders in my meetings with them.

“While there is no one simple solution to resolve the high cost of insurance in Ireland, it is my ambition that the new PIRB model will have more cases resolved through it in a timely, cost-effective way. I look forward to engaging with stakeholders as we progress to drafting and through the legislative process to ensure our reforms are robust and effective.”