In Kettle Produce Ltd v Ward EATS/0016/06, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has considered whether it was discriminatory for a male manager to enter the female toilets and shout at a female employee.
In (1) Walker (2) Premier Model Management Ltd v (1) BHS Ltd (2) Hough, the EAT holds that discriminatory acts that took place after the termination of the employee's employment were deemed to have sufficient proximity to the employment relationship so as to give rise to a continuing act of sex discrimination for the purposes of a claim under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975.
In Vento v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (No.2), the Court of Appeal holds that an employment tribunal was entitled to award £165,000 for future loss of earnings to a probationer police constable who suffered sex discrimination, culminating in her dismissal at the age of 30, two years after her appointment.
In Pearce v Governing Body of Mayfield School, the Court of Appeal holds that in determining whether a lesbian teacher has been discriminated against on grounds of sex, the correct comparator to use is a male homosexual teacher.
According to the Court of Appeal, the teacher, who was subjected to homophobic taunts and harassment by pupils that did not, at the time they occurred, amount to less favourable treatment on the grounds of her sex under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 ("the SDA"), could not rely on provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights ("the Convention"), as scheduled to the Human Rights Act 1998 ("the HRA"), to claim retrospective compensation.
In HM Prison Service v Salmon, the EAT upholds an award of £20,000 for injury to feelings, including £5,000 aggravated damages, and a separate, undiscounted award of £15,000 for psychiatric injury, made by an employment tribunal that had partially upheld a former prison officer's complaint of unlawful sex discrimination.
In Driskel v Peninsula Business Services Ltd and others, the EAT holds that a woman in the unenviable position of having to seek promotion by way of a one-to-one interview with a man for whom she had an antipathy was subjected to remarks from him which, in an appalling fashion, sought to exploit the situation by reference to the sex of, respectively, interviewee and interviewer.
In Coyne v The Home Office, the EAT upholds the decision of an employment tribunal that an employer's failure to carry out a proper investigation into an employee's complaint of sexual harassment was unlawful discrimination on the grounds of sex.
In Wade v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire and others, the Court of Appeal holds that an employment tribunal properly had in mind the evidence as a whole, and that a campaign of sexual harassment was being alleged, when it made findings of fact on specific allegations.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to harassment in relation to sex.