Court of Appeal Blocks Claimant From Making the Same Argument Twice
A former employee who raised data protection arguments as part of a settled defamation claim has been told he cannot now include the same issues in a new data protection claim
What Was the Background to the Claim?
In the case of Warburton v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset, Mr Warburton brought defamation proceedings against his former employer (Avon and Somerset), after Avon and Somerset disclosed information about allegations made against Mr Warburton during his previous employment. Mr Warburton amended his claim to introduce data protection complaints, although he did not formally plead those elements. Avon and Somerset made an offer to settle 'the whole of the claim' and settlement was reached.
Mr Warburton then brought separate proceedings relating to the same data protection complaints. Avon and Somerset appealed for the claim to be struck out, and Mr Warburton appealed. He argued he had 'raised' the data protection arguments in the defamation claim, but that he had not formally 'pleaded' the data protection claims in those proceedings, he should now be allowed to do so.
What Did the Court of Appeal Decide?
The Court of Appeal dismissed Mr Warburton's appeal. It took into account the rule against relitigating a dispute once a court has disposed of it, save for on appeal. It also took into account the 'Henderson rule'. This is a rule of principle preventing litigants from advancing causes of action or arguments they could have brought in earlier proceedings.
Mr Warburton had attempted to argue that Henderson did not apply because whilst he had raised the data protection arguments previously, he had not formally included them in his claim. The Court of Appeal disagreed, holding that parties are not permitted to open the same subject of litigation in respect of matters which could and should have been brought as part of the first case. To accept Mr Warburton's argument would enable a significant abuse of process and would undermine the public interest in the finality of litigation.
What Can Employers Learn From This Case?
This is a sensible outcome which should be reassuring to employers. It also serves as a reminder of the importance of clearly defining the scope of the claims and/or issues to be settled under a settlement agreement.
