Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

Chris Hadrill, partner in the employment team at Redmans, explains what “gagging clauses” are, what they are used for, and what makes these clauses so controversial


What is a “gagging clause”?

A “gagging clause” is the colloquial term commonly used in the media to describe confidentiality obligations under a contract (normally a ‘settlement agreement’). These clauses normally impose an obligation on one or more parties not to disclose particular information to third parties – they normally preclude one (or more) of the parties to the agreement from disclosing the existence, terms or circumstances of the agreement.

What are “gagging clauses” used for?

Gagging clauses are normally used to prevent one or more parties to an agreement from disclosing particular information, as identified above. There are many reasons why a party (normally an employer with settlement agreements) would want to prevent an employee from disclosing the existence or terms of a settlement agreement – this can range from a desire to ensure that potentially embarrassing facts are kept as secret as possible, to ensure that other employees don’t use the terms negotiated as a precedent if they’re seeking to negotiate their own deal, and to ensure that morale in a department isn’t damaged by the deal.

Who most commonly uses “gagging clauses”?

In the context of settlement agreements “gagging clauses” are most commonly used by employers seeking to prevent employees (and other third parties) from disclosing to the public the existence, terms and effect of the relevant settlement agreement.

Why are these clauses so controversial?

“Gagging clauses” have proved controversial for a variety of reasons, including:

  1. They, on a broad level, seek to impose swingeing restrictions on an employee’s freedom of speech
  2. They can sometimes be used to prevent disclosure of criminal wrongdoing or regulatory breaches (for example, victims of sexual harassment at work may be required to agree not to disclose the circumstances of the harassment they suffered in order to obtain a payout; equally there has been concern that public bodies such as the NHS may be using, or may have used, confidentiality restrictions in order to prevent the publication of legitimate concerns about public safety)
  3. The ability of the employer to impose powerful confidentiality clauses is strengthened by the nature of the power structures that exist within a workplace. Or, to put it another way, the employer has the resources to make life difficult for an employee if the employee is reluctant to agree to confidentiality restrictions (for example, the employer could withdraw the settlement agreement or refuse to pay a particular sum of money if the employee won’t agree to the confidentiality restrictions

Although concerns about how gagging clauses are used are legitimate, such clauses do serve an important function in limiting risk to all parties to an agreement (including, of course, reputational risk to employers). Given the importance of gagging clauses, rather than imposing a ban on the use of these clauses (as has been suggested by some national newspapers and public bodies), a more balanced view needs to be taken of the cost and benefit of ‘gagging clauses’ in particular situations – imposing ‘gagging clauses’ to prevent a victim of sexual harassment or a concerned doctor from disclosing their concerns to the proper authorities (or their lawyer or employer) is clearly wrong, but, equally, in some circumstances the victim of, for example, an incident of sexual harassment may wish to prevent details of the harassment from being made public. Banning ‘gagging clauses’ would therefore be a clumsy broadbrush measure which would prevent parties to settlement agreements from taking into account, and pricing, the risk and benefits of including confidentiality clauses in such agreements.

As a final point, it is also important to point out that under section 43K Employment Rights Act 1996 it is unlawful for employers to prevent employees from making protected disclosures (also known as ‘whistleblowing’) – this means that employers should not be able to rely on confidentiality clauses/’gagging clauses’ to prevent employees from, for example, disclosing criminal conduct on their employer’s part to the police or disclosing a regulatory breach to a regulator.

About

Redmans Employment Team deal with employment matters for both employers and employees, including drafting employment contracts and policies, advising employers and employees on compromise agreements, handling day-to-day HR issues, advising on restructures, and handling Employment Tribunal cases for both employers and employees Call 020 3397 3603 to speak to one of the members of our employment team or email us on enquiries@redmans.co.uk. Redmans have offices in Richmond, Chiswick, Hammersmith, Fulham, Kingston, Wimbledon, Ealing, Kings Cross and Marylebone (meetings strictly by appointment only).

Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

Share →

Our awards

Request a callback

    Your first name (required)

    Your last name (required)

    Your email (required)

    Your telephone number (required)

    Brief details of your enquiry

    Contact us

    Please feel free to discuss your own position and concerns. Contact your nearest office on:

    T: 020 3397 3603
    E: enquiries@redmans.co.uk
    W: www.redmans.co.uk

    Testimonials

    4.76 Average

    235 Reviews

    Paul O

    Chris & Rana guided me through a redundancy discussion. Prompt & patient assistance with the documents & meetings. Clear advice & fast responses regarding negotiations. Would definitely recommend & would use again without hesitation.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Anonymous

    Outstanding, efficient service. Thank you so much!

    Posted 1 month ago

    Jaswant S

    Very very happy with the good service I got Thank you so much for your help

    Posted 1 month ago

    Anonymous

    Mel and Chris were fantastic and supportive throughout! 1000% recommend.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Emma D

    Good responsive service

    Posted 1 month ago

    Mike T

    Good efficient service.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Brenda G

    Very professional and helpful

    Posted 1 month ago

    Charles A

    Chris Hadrill was recommended to me when I found myself in need of a solicitor at very short notice. He contacted me almost immediately to arrange a call. Chris handled my case in a professional and timely manner and kept me notified throughout. Chris inspired confidence and made me feel I was being cared for. If ever I'm in need of legal representation, I would not hesitate to contact Chris. And will gladly recommend him to family and friends.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Rosalind R

    I was very happy with the service that I received from Redmans Solicitors. They were able to advise me accordingly with regards to my employment matter and stay within the agreed costing.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Karl B

    Caroline and Chris were so helpful and friendly. Couldn't of asked for a better service.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Dimitrios P

    Excellent, professional service, in time and within the expected value.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Barbara K

    Everything quickly and fairly. Very professional. Thank you.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Sabrina J

    I received a efficient professional service during the whole process of liasing between myself and my former employer to getting all forms signed and receiving my redundancy payment in full in the summer of this year.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Anonymous

    I received legal advice on a redundancy settlement agreement from Redmans Solicitors and was very impressed by the quality of their service. Chris Hadrill is highly experienced in settlement matters and was especially understanding of the particulars of my case, going out of his way to ensure that it was resolved quickly and with the utmost professionalism. I have no hesitation in recommending Redmans to anyone in need of employment advice and settlement resolution.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Anonymous

    Excellent service, with full explanations of everything needed. Both Chris and Mel answered all emails very promptly and were personable and efficient.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Anonymous

    I would like to thank Chris Hadrill, in particular who handled my case, for all his hard work, expertise and dedication. He listened with empathy and offered suitable advice, which made me feel valued and confident through a difficult time. I would highly recommend Chris and the team at Redmans Solicitors. Thank you.

    Posted 1 month ago

    Yann G

    Yann Guezennec / Chris Hadrill - Thanks for the detailed, informed and professional advice for my settlement. When comprise is the rule I felt we could have been maybe a bit more aggressive from the start. However an acceptable outcome considering the situation. Thank you

    Posted 1 month ago

    Valentina D

    Great service from Mel, she was very good at explaining every part of the settlement agreement and very efficient dealing with the HR team. Very professional team, I would definitely use them again in future if the opportunity came up.

    Posted 2 months ago

    Olaf S

    I was very happy with the service that I have received. Thank You Regards

    Posted 2 months ago

    Rebecca A

    I had a wonderful solicitor called Caroline who was so helpful and gave me all the information I need and explained everything in detail so I was crystal clear. Would highly recommend if you are in need of a solicitor!

    Posted 2 months ago

    Gareth J

    Very efficient, helpful and pragmatic support from Caroline. Happy to work with my requirements / suggestions but also made some very good points which helped to achieve a higher settlement amount. Would highly recommend Caroline and Chris.

    Posted 2 months ago