Gallagher v McKinnon’s Auto and Tyres Ltd (2024)

EAT upholds ET’s decision that a protected conversation / pre-termination negotiations were inadmissible in relation to the Claimant’s claim for unfair dismissal, as the confidentiality of the negotiations are protected under section 111A Employment Rights Act 1996. The Claimant had been offered an enhanced redundancy package by the Respondent during a return to work meeting and was given 48 hours to consider it. The Claimant sought to rely upon the discussion as evidence in support of an unfair dismissal claim, contending that it was admissible under the exception afforded by section 111A(4) Employment Rights Act 1996, which relates to improper conduct (the Claimant arguing that undue pressure had been applied). The EAT, however, rejected this, stating that the Respondent's conduct in terms of having the protected conversation during a return to work meeting and providing the Claimant with 48 hours to consider the offer did not constitute impropriety / undue pressure. Moreover, in support of this, the EAT pointed out that a redundancy process was to follow if the offer was rejected, not dismissal.