header-logo header-logo

05 July 2007 / Michael Salter , Chris Bryden
Issue: 7280 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Third party harassment

To what extent can employers be held liable for harassment caused to their employees by third parties? Michael Salter and Chris Bryden report

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in Gravell v London Borough of Bexley UKEAT/0587/06/CEA, [2007] All ER (D) 220 (May) opens up the possibility that employers can be held liable for the harassment of their employees by the actions of third parties, be they customers in a shop or schoolchildren in a classroom.

DISCRIMINATION LAW

The law of discrimination, before the addition of the relevant harassment provisions into the various discrimination legislation, was quite clear. In Burton v De Vere Hotels Ltd [1997] ICR 1, [1996] IRLR 596 the EAT allowed an appeal by two waitresses against the finding of the employment tribunal that they had not been directly discriminated against by their employer when they were subjected to racially offensive remarks by a person working as a comedian at a private function in their employer’s hotel, but not employed by the respondent. While the harassment provisions were not in

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

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers drives further growth in its UK immigration team with new partner Sophie Barrett-Brown

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal invests in next generation of legal talent as specialist litigation practice grows

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips continues momentum in London with arrival of Catrina Smith

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll