Mr K Czajka First v All About Community Limited Second Respondent: Mr G Bentley — 2021

Mr Czajka worked for All About Community Limited from 24 April 2019 until 31 May 2019. He alleged sexual harassment by Mr Bentley under section 26 EqA 2010, and also brought complaints about unlawful deductions from wages and failure to provide payslips or itemised pay statements. The tribunal noted that the workplace was an LGBTQ+ bar and sexual fetish club where sexual talk was common, but that context did not itself establish harassment. It also recorded that the claimant first resigned on 9 April 2019 over tax and payslip concerns, withdrew that resignation, and then resigned again on 16 May 2019, when he first raised the harassment allegations with Ms Chambers.

On the harassment claim, the tribunal applied the section 136 burden of proof and the authorities it cited, but held there were not sufficient facts from which discrimination could be inferred. It accepted some isolated matters, including an early question about whether the claimant had a boyfriend, compliments on appearance and voice, a touch to the stomach, and a single occasion when a penis photograph appeared while the claimant was looking through holiday photos. It rejected other allegations, including any express discussion of sexual positions, any suggestion to use the swing, repeated penis photographs, and the alleged attempted kiss. Looking at the incidents individually and in the round, the tribunal found they did not amount to unwanted conduct of a sexual nature that crossed the section 26 threshold.

The tribunal also said that, had harassment been made out, the First Respondent had led no evidence to support a section 109(4) EqA defence and its training arrangements were inadequate. The wage and payslip complaints succeeded by concession: the First Respondent accepted that it had made unlawful deductions and had failed to provide payslips in a timely manner, and judgment was entered for the agreed net sum of £1,715.55 against the First Respondent. No separate discrimination compensation or injury to feelings award was made because the harassment claim failed.