Shorter Reads

Sexual Harassment & the risk of relying on workplace ‘banter’ to defend a claim

In the recent case of Bratt v JGQC Solicitors Ltd, a legal secretary, Megan Bratt, won her sexual harassment claim against her boss due to remarks that were found to be sexual in nature and therefore created an intimidating environment.

The case serves as a stark reminder of the risk of relying on workplace ‘banter’ to defend a sexual harassment case.

2 minute read

Published 24 July 2024

Authors

Share

Key information

The recent case of Bratt v JGQC Solicitors Ltd is a stark reminder of the risk of relying on workplace ‘banter’ to defend a sexual harassment case.

In this case, Miss Bratt, a legal secretary, issued a claim against her employer following a series of incidents involving the owner of the law firm, Mr Hall. One such incident that has been picked up in the media involved Mr Hall telling Miss Bratt that she “looked nice”, before asking if he was allowed to say that. Without context, such a comment might be construed as being friendly, however, in this case, the Tribunal found that it was of a sexual nature and met the threshold for sexual harassment. In reaching this conclusion, the Tribunal took into consideration Miss Bratt’s response to the comment and contemporaneous messages she sent to her boyfriend about it.

It is crucial to note that this comment was one of several examples of sexual harassment regarding Mr Hall, which, when taken together, give a much clearer picture of the working environment in which Miss Bratt worked. On another occasion, Mr Hall told Miss Bratt about his ex-partner whom he caught cheating on him with a 22 year police officer and referred to there being a used condom on the floor. Miss Bratt also saw images of women dressed in lingerie in provocative poses on Mr Hall’s Facebook account when she helped him install the app and was shown a video of Mr Hall’s girlfriend in a provocative position.

Under the Equality Act 2010, sexual harassment is defined as unwanted conduct of a sexual nature that has the purpose or effect of violating a person’s dignity, or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment.

Based on the facts of this case, the Tribunal found that Miss Bratt was subjected to an “offensive environment and arguably an intimidating one”. The Tribunal gave short shrift to the law firm’s defence of ‘banter’ stating that “it is immaterial whether the conduct is acceptable to others or is indeed common in the workplace” and confirming that labelling conduct as ‘banter’ “does not make it nonetheless unwanted conduct of a sexual nature.”

This case highlights the importance of addressing sexual harassment in the workplace in a serious and appropriate manner. Failure to do so can lead to significant legal and reputational consequences for employers.

In light of the new legal duty for employers to take ‘reasonable steps’ to prevent sexual harassment which comes into force this October, it is more important than ever for employers to take proactive action to protect employees from sexual harassment.

In order for an employer to show that they have taken ‘reasonable steps’ to prevent sexual harassment, they should:

  • Ensure there is an effective system in place for employees to safely disclose complaints or concerns about sexual harassment and make sure this system is clearly communicated to employees.
  • Conduct a comprehensive investigation into any complaint of sexual harassment.
    Make sure appropriate policies are in place dealing with diversity, equality and inclusion, and anti-harassment. These should be regularly reviewed to ensure they are up-to-date and, crucially, employers need to ensure staff are made aware of both the existence of those policies and the requirement to comply with them.
  • Arrange regular training for all staff on diversity, equality and inclusion, including specific training on harassment in the workplace. Employers should keep a record of attendance and make sure all employees participate. Training should be appropriate and address risks that could arise in the specific industry.
  • Generic training material will be unlikely to convince a Tribunal that reasonable steps have been taken.
  • Watch out for updated guidance on sexual harassment and harassment at work from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC).

If an Employment Tribunal find an employer to be in breach of the duty to prevent sexual harassment, the employer may be ordered to pay additional compensation of up to 25%.

Related latest updates
PREV NEXT

Related content

Arrow Back to Insights

Shorter Reads

Sexual Harassment & the risk of relying on workplace ‘banter’ to defend a claim

In the recent case of Bratt v JGQC Solicitors Ltd, a legal secretary, Megan Bratt, won her sexual harassment claim against her boss due to remarks that were found to be sexual in nature and therefore created an intimidating environment.

The case serves as a stark reminder of the risk of relying on workplace ‘banter’ to defend a sexual harassment case.

Published 24 July 2024

Associated sectors / services

  • Employment law for employees
  • Employment law for employers

Authors

The recent case of Bratt v JGQC Solicitors Ltd is a stark reminder of the risk of relying on workplace ‘banter’ to defend a sexual harassment case.

In this case, Miss Bratt, a legal secretary, issued a claim against her employer following a series of incidents involving the owner of the law firm, Mr Hall. One such incident that has been picked up in the media involved Mr Hall telling Miss Bratt that she “looked nice”, before asking if he was allowed to say that. Without context, such a comment might be construed as being friendly, however, in this case, the Tribunal found that it was of a sexual nature and met the threshold for sexual harassment. In reaching this conclusion, the Tribunal took into consideration Miss Bratt’s response to the comment and contemporaneous messages she sent to her boyfriend about it.

It is crucial to note that this comment was one of several examples of sexual harassment regarding Mr Hall, which, when taken together, give a much clearer picture of the working environment in which Miss Bratt worked. On another occasion, Mr Hall told Miss Bratt about his ex-partner whom he caught cheating on him with a 22 year police officer and referred to there being a used condom on the floor. Miss Bratt also saw images of women dressed in lingerie in provocative poses on Mr Hall’s Facebook account when she helped him install the app and was shown a video of Mr Hall’s girlfriend in a provocative position.

Under the Equality Act 2010, sexual harassment is defined as unwanted conduct of a sexual nature that has the purpose or effect of violating a person’s dignity, or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment.

Based on the facts of this case, the Tribunal found that Miss Bratt was subjected to an “offensive environment and arguably an intimidating one”. The Tribunal gave short shrift to the law firm’s defence of ‘banter’ stating that “it is immaterial whether the conduct is acceptable to others or is indeed common in the workplace” and confirming that labelling conduct as ‘banter’ “does not make it nonetheless unwanted conduct of a sexual nature.”

This case highlights the importance of addressing sexual harassment in the workplace in a serious and appropriate manner. Failure to do so can lead to significant legal and reputational consequences for employers.

In light of the new legal duty for employers to take ‘reasonable steps’ to prevent sexual harassment which comes into force this October, it is more important than ever for employers to take proactive action to protect employees from sexual harassment.

In order for an employer to show that they have taken ‘reasonable steps’ to prevent sexual harassment, they should:

  • Ensure there is an effective system in place for employees to safely disclose complaints or concerns about sexual harassment and make sure this system is clearly communicated to employees.
  • Conduct a comprehensive investigation into any complaint of sexual harassment.
    Make sure appropriate policies are in place dealing with diversity, equality and inclusion, and anti-harassment. These should be regularly reviewed to ensure they are up-to-date and, crucially, employers need to ensure staff are made aware of both the existence of those policies and the requirement to comply with them.
  • Arrange regular training for all staff on diversity, equality and inclusion, including specific training on harassment in the workplace. Employers should keep a record of attendance and make sure all employees participate. Training should be appropriate and address risks that could arise in the specific industry.
  • Generic training material will be unlikely to convince a Tribunal that reasonable steps have been taken.
  • Watch out for updated guidance on sexual harassment and harassment at work from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC).

If an Employment Tribunal find an employer to be in breach of the duty to prevent sexual harassment, the employer may be ordered to pay additional compensation of up to 25%.

Associated sectors / services

  • Employment law for employees
  • Employment law for employers

Authors

Need some more information? Make an enquiry below.

    Subscribe

    Please add your details and your areas of interest below

    Specialist sectors:

    Legal services:

    Other information:

    Jurisdictions of interest to you (other than UK):



    Article contributor

    Enjoy reading our articles? why not subscribe to notifications so you’ll never miss one?

    Subscribe to our articles

    Message us on WhatsApp (calling not available)

    Please note that Collyer Bristow provides this service during office hours for general information and enquiries only and that no legal or other professional advice will be provided over the WhatsApp platform. Please also note that if you choose to use this platform your personal data is likely to be processed outside the UK and EEA, including in the US. Appropriate legal or other professional opinion should be taken before taking or omitting to take any action in respect of any specific problem. Collyer Bristow LLP accepts no liability for any loss or damage which may arise from reliance on information provided. All information will be deleted immediately upon completion of a conversation.

    I accept Close

    Close
    Scroll up

    Find out about Business

    Find out about Dispute Resolution

    Find out about Individuals & Families

    Find out about Real Estate

    We are Collyer Bristow - The law firm for those that
    value individuality, creativity and collaboration.

    Legal & Pricing info Regulatory InformationAccessibilitySitemapPricing and service information

    Read our latest article: Are you a member?

    Listen to our latest podcast: Ensure that you insure (Part 2)

    Read our latest article: Workplace culture and the proactive duty to prevent sexual harassment: What do employers need to know?

    Listen to our latest podcast: US/UK Estate Planning – What you need to know (We’re the Brits in America) (Part 2)

    Read our latest article: Trends in International Arbitration: A review of the 2023 casework statistics for the LCIA and ICC

    ExpandNeed some help?Toggle

    < Back to menu

    I have an issue and need your help

    Scroll to see our A-Z list of expertise

    Get in touch

    Get in touch using our form below.



      Business Close
      Private Wealth Close
      Hot Topics Close