Miss S McPherson v Cote Restaurants Limited FINAL HEARING — 2020

Miss S McPherson was employed as General Manager of Côte Brasserie in Birmingham from 10 June 2016 until her dismissal on 19 January 2018. She brought direct sex discrimination and sexual harassment complaints arising from the conduct of her area manager, Mr Adrian Cunningham, and from the disciplinary and dismissal process. The tribunal held that the claim was presented out of time because of the early conciliation/rejection/re-presentation history, and it refused to extend time on a just and equitable basis under section 123 EQA 2010.

On the facts, the tribunal rejected most of the claimant's allegations of aggressive or unsupportive management, recruitment and staffing complaints, discount, promotion, and comparator-based claims. It accepted some isolated matters, including that Mr Cunningham asked the claimant about a possible relationship with Mr Morgan on more than one occasion, that he made a comment about Ms Numm's appearance, and that the disciplinary and dismissal meeting was held in a public venue at Grand Central. It also found that the dismissal process was predetermined and unfair, but the tribunal noted that no unfair dismissal claim was before it.

For the harassment claim, the tribunal held that the only conduct related to sex was Mr Cunningham's comment about Ms Numm. It found that comment inappropriate but not enough, on the evidence heard, to have the purpose or effect required by section 26 EQA 2010. The public venue used for the disciplinary and dismissal meeting was treated as unwanted conduct, and the tribunal considered that choice was more likely due to hostility than incompetence, but it found that conduct was not related to sex.

For the direct discrimination claim, the tribunal concluded that the claimant had not shown less favourable treatment because of sex. It held that the treatment complained of was not connected to the claimant being a woman, but instead reflected a personal falling-out between her and Mr Cunningham, and there was no proper basis for inferring sex discrimination from the evidence, including the appeal handled by Mr Cipollaro. All complaints were therefore dismissed.