The claimant alleged that her manager at work had harassed her. The court, applying Conn, had found that none of the acts complained of were sufficiently serious to amount to criminal conduct, and had rejected the claim.
Held: The claimant’s appeal succeeded. Since Majrowski, courts have been asked to consider whether the conduct complained of is ‘oppressive and unacceptable’ as opposed to merely unattractive, unreasonable or regrettable. The primary focus is on whether the conduct is oppressive and unacceptable, albeit the court must keep in mind that it must be of an order which ‘would sustain criminal liability’. The court might ask whether a criminal complaint under the Act would be rejected as an abuse of process.
The account of victimisation, demoralisation and the reduction of a substantially reasonable and usually robust woman to a state of clinical depression is not simply an account of ‘unattractive’ and ‘unreasonable’ conduct (in Lord Nicholl’s words) or ‘the ordinary banter and badinage of life’ (in Baroness Hale’s words). It self-evidently crosses the line into conduct which is ‘oppressive and unreasonable’.
The presence of malice makes satisfaction of the ‘oppressive and unacceptable’ test easier to achieve.
Maurice Kay LJ stated: ‘it seems to me that, since Majrowski, courts have been enjoined to consider whether the conduct complained of is ‘oppressive and unacceptable’ as opposed to merely unattractive, unreasonable or regrettable. The primary focus is on whether the conduct is oppressive and unacceptable, albeit the court must keep in mind that it must be of an order which ‘would sustain criminal liability’ . . It may be that, if asked, a prosecutor would be reluctant to prosecute but that is not the consideration, which is whether the conduct is of ‘an order which would sustain criminal liability’. I consider that, in the event of a prosecution, the proven conduct would be sufficient to establish criminal liability. I do not accept that, in a criminal court, the proceedings would properly be stayed as an abuse of process.’
Waller, MauriceKay, Rimer LJJ
[2009] EWCA Civ 1288, [2010] IRLR 132
Bailii
Protection from Harassment Act 1997 1
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Sutherland v Hatton; Barber v Somerset County Council and similar CA 5-Feb-2002
Defendant employers appealed findings of liability for personal injuries consisting of an employee’s psychiatric illness caused by stress at work.
Held: Employers have a duty to take reasonable care for the safety of their employees. There are . .
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 – 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 – Allen v London Borough of Southwark CA 12-Nov-2008
The claimant appealed against a strike out of his claim for harrassment after being subjected to five sets of possession proceedings by the defendant, each of which relied upon the same bad point.
Held: The Court refused to strike out a claim . .
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 – 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 by:
Cited – Rayment v Ministry of Defence QBD 18-Feb-2010
The claimant sought damages alleging harassment by officers employed by the defendant. An internal investigation had revealed considerable poor behaviour by the senior officers, and that was followed by hostile behaviour. The defendant had put up . .
Cited – Boylin v The Christie NHS Foundation QBD 17-Oct-2014
The claimant a senior employee manager complained of harassment and common law negligence causing her injury.
Held: The claim failed. Behaviour of the level required to found a claim under the 1997 Act was established, but only on one occaion . .
Cited – Gerrard and Another v Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Ltd and Another QBD 27-Nov-2020
The claimants, a solicitor and his wife, sought damages in harassment and data protection, against a party to proceedings in which he was acting professionally, and against the investigative firm instructed by them. The defendants now requested the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Torts – Other
Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.381717