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

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll