header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
17 February 2011 / Michael Salter , Chris Bryden
Issue: 7453 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Contentious third parties

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Chris Bryden & Michael Salter revisit a familiar theme

While the legal position under the Equality Act 2010 clarifies the law and puts third party harassment claims on a clearer footing, the judgment of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in the case of Conteh v Parking Partners Limited UKEAT/0288/10/SM is an interesting consideration of the application of the Race Relations Act 1976 to such claims, and touches upon contentions previously raised by the authors (158 NLJ, 7342, p 1474).

Facts

Ms Conteh is a black African female, born in Sierra Leone. She was employed as a customer car park attendant for a company that provided car parking facilities in various developments. On 14 March 2009, a member of marketing staff employed by St George’s, in the development served by the car parking facilities provided by Parking Partners, did not have a validated ticket to leave the car park. She was told by Conteh that she could not leave, though she in fact did so.

The next morning another member of the marketing

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Regulatory team boosted by partner hire amid rising health and safety demand

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Legal director promoted to partner at specialist pensions firm

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Residential development capability expands with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Mazur and more—inside the litigation frontline

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

NLJ this week: Social media bans for children spark legal dilemmas
Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
NLJ this week: Leasehold reform risks creating ‘forgotten freeholders’
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
NLJ this week: Court of Appeal clarifies when a claim truly begins
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
NLJ this week: Split FDRs could ease pressure—and boost settlements
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll