The claimant appealed against the striking out of his claim of harassment against the Authority who had contacted him in an intended review of pensions mis-selling. They had contacted him once by letter, once by telephone and once by e-mail.
Held: The judge had failed properly to make an assessment of the case, but even accepting the claimant’s version of events entirely the claim was hopeless.
Lewison LJ said: ‘this conduct comes nowhere near crossing the threshold. It is not even at the front garden gate. Whether the regulator could have established one or other (or both) of the statutory defences is not a question that arises. I echo the words of Ward LJ in Sunderland City Council v Conn at [19]: what on earth is the world coming to if conduct of the kind that occurred in this case can be thought to be harassment, potentially liable to giving rise to criminal proceedings punishable with imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, and to a claim for damages for anxiety and financial loss? I would dismiss the appeal.’
Laws, Lewison, Bean LJJ
[2015] EWCA Civ 192
Bailii
Protection from Harassment Act 1997 1 7
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust HL 12-Jul-2006
Employer can be liable for Managers Harassment
The claimant employee sought damages, saying that he had been bullied by his manager and that bullying amounting to harassment under the 1997 Act. The employer now appealed a finding that it was responsible for a tort committed by a manager, saying . .
Cited – Ferguson v British Gas Trading Ltd CA 10-Feb-2009
Harassment to Criminal Level needed to Convict
The claimant had been a customer of the defendant, but had moved to another supplier. She was then subjected to a constant stream of threatening letters which she could not stop despite re-assurances and complaints. The defendant now appealed . .
Cited – Dowson and Others v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police QBD 20-Oct-2010
Six officers sought damages under the 1997 Act alleging harassment by a senior officer of the defendant.
Held: Simon J set out what a claimant must prove in an harassment claim:
‘(1) There must be conduct which occurs on at least two . .
Cited – Smith v Regina CACD 29-Nov-2012
The defendant had been acquitted of offences relating to the damage of aircraft by reason of his insanity. The court now considered the making of an order under the 1977 Act after that acquittal.
Held: The court set out the following . .
Cited – Three Rivers District Council and Others v Governor and Company of The Bank of England (No 3) HL 22-Mar-2001
Misfeasance in Public Office – Recklessness
The bank sought to strike out the claim alleging misfeasance in public office in having failed to regulate the failed bank, BCCI.
Held: Misfeasance in public office might occur not only when a company officer acted to injure a party, but also . .
Cited – Conn v Sunderland CA 7-Nov-2007
The claimant said that he had been harassed by the respondent through an employee.
Held: Under the 1997 Act, the behaviour had to go beyond the regrettable to the unacceptable, and would be of such gravity as would sustain criminal liability . .
Cited – E D and F Man Liquid Products Ltd v Patel and Another CA 4-Apr-2003
The rules contained two occasions on which a court would consider dismissal of a claim as having ‘no real prospect’ of success.
Held: The only significant difference between CPR 24.2 and 13.3(1), is that under the first the overall burden of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Torts – Other, Litigation Practice
Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.544281