Rhys-Harper v Relaxion Group plc: CA 3 May 2001

A sex discrimination claim involving a claim by an employee for damages for sexual harassment, had to be made during the period of employment. An employer’s failure to deal properly with an allegation of sexual harassment could itself be a detriment under the Act and Directive. The fact that the statutes against sex discrimination and race discrimination might have some disparities did not mean, that for this purpose at least, they could not be read similarly. The EAT had therefore been correct to follow the decision in Adekeye in this case.

Judges:

Lord Justice Pill, Lord Justice Mantell And Lord Justice Buxton

Citations:

Times 12-Jun-2001, Gazette 14-Jun-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 634, [2001] 2 CMLR 44, [2001] IRLR 460, [2001] ICR 1176, [2001] Emp LR 646

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Sex Discrimination Act 1975

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedPost Office v Adekeye CA 13-Nov-1996
Race discrimination which took place after a dismissal was not unlawful within the section, since that first required the context of employment, and after the dismissal, the applicant was no longer in that employment. The natural meaning of the . .
Appealed toRelaxion Group plc v Rhys-Harper; D’Souza v London Borough of Lambeth; Jones v 3M Healthcare Limited and three other actions HL 19-Jun-2003
The court considered whether discriminatory acts after the termination of employment were caught by the respective anti-discrimination Acts. The acts included a failure to give proper references. They pursued claims on the basis of victimisation . .
CitedCoote v Granada Hospitality Ltd ECJ 22-Sep-1998
coote_granadaECJ1998
The employer had refused to provide a reference after the claimant had left the company after making a sex discrimination claim. She said this was victimisation.
Held: The state has a duty to protect workers against retaliation after . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromRelaxion Group plc v Rhys-Harper; D’Souza v London Borough of Lambeth; Jones v 3M Healthcare Limited and three other actions HL 19-Jun-2003
The court considered whether discriminatory acts after the termination of employment were caught by the respective anti-discrimination Acts. The acts included a failure to give proper references. They pursued claims on the basis of victimisation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Employment

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.88769