Case 2209567/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms E O’Driscoll v Zelo Digital Recruitment Limited; and and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 2209567/2023
- Decision date
- 20 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Forde
- Venue
- London Central
- Panel members
- Mr. L Smith, Mr. R Baber
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Ms E O’Driscoll
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal unanimously upheld three complaints of harassment related to sex brought by Ms E O’Driscoll. It found that on 29 July 2022 Mr Gregory Mark circulated a photograph on the work WhatsApp group of another woman that was harassing to the claimant, and that on 5 December 2022 a photograph was shown to the claimant and her work colleagues that had been adulterated to superimpose images of employees, including the claimant, onto the bodies of scantily clad women. The tribunal also found that Mr Mark slapped the claimant across her buttocks at the place and time alleged by her.
The remaining complaints of harassment related to sex were dismissed. The complaints of victimisation were also dismissed. The tribunal therefore recorded partial success only on the harassment claim and no success on victimisation.
The respondent was ordered to pay £1,878.80 for past financial losses, £17,000 for injury to feelings, and £500 for loss of statutory rights, making a total award of £19,378.80. The judgment does not record a basic award or interest.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harassment | The tribunal upheld three sex-related harassment complaints: the circulation on 29 July 2022 of a photograph on the work WhatsApp group of another woman, the showing on 5 December 2022 of an adulterated photograph superimposing employees including the claimant onto the bodies of scantily clad women, and the alleged slap across the claimant's buttocks at the place and time alleged. The remaining harassment complaints were dismissed. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Victimisation | The complaints of victimisation were found not well-founded and were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £19,379
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £2,379
- compensatory remedy recorded
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.