EAT Harassment – The Claimant made complaints of harassment under various protected characteristics. The Employment Tribunal found some proved, and the majority of the claims not proved. The Claimant appealed against the findings on those which were not proved. Held the Employment Tribunal had erred in law in the method used by one member to decide on credibility. Further, the Employment Tribunal erred in law in finding that the Claimant could not be harassed unless he shared the protected characteristic. Case remitted to a Tribunal to reconsider, leaving the findings of harassment intact and reconsidering the whole case in light of them, and applying the law correctly that there is no need for the Claimant to share the protected characteristic, whether any claims found not proved have been proved.
Cross-appeal: the First Respondent cross-appealed on a finding of harassment on grounds of disability, on the basis that the First Respondent did not know of the disability.
Held: cross-appeal dismissed, there being no requirement of knowledge.
Lady Stacey
[2016] UKEAT 0375 – 14 – 0501
Bailii
England and Wales
Employment, Discrimination
Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.558200
