In person For the v Bon Appetit Group Ltd (in liquidation) — 2024

The claimant brought claims of direct discrimination and harassment on the grounds of his sexuality, victimisation, and a final resignation-based discrimination claim. The respondent did not attend the hearing. The tribunal heard the claimant’s evidence and considered the documents, including the grievance correspondence and the resignation email. It found that there had been a poor working relationship between the claimant and Ms Slabu at the Nine Elms site, but that most of the pleaded incidents were ordinary unpleasant behaviour rather than conduct related to sexual orientation.

The tribunal accepted, on the balance of probabilities, that Ms Slabu made the homophobic comment alleged by the claimant. It found that this was unwanted conduct related to sexual orientation and that the harassment claim therefore succeeded. By contrast, the first five alleged incidents in the harassment schedule were found not to be related to the claimant’s sexual orientation, because there were no accompanying words linking them to sexuality and the tribunal considered the behaviour more likely to arise from disagreement about how the site should be run.

The direct discrimination claim failed. The tribunal found that the claimant’s grievance was not ignored, because Mr Broderick took some action and gave Ms Slabu a warning, and that the claimant’s being sent to other sites and later moved away from Nine Elms was caused by the breakdown in the working relationship, not because of sexual orientation. The victimisation claim also failed: the WhatsApp message of 19 January 2024 amounted to a protected act, but the tribunal found the complained-of treatment was not because of that protected act, and in any event the claimant did not show the alleged moves were detriments in the circumstances.

The final claim, brought on the basis that a resignation in response to an unlawful act should itself be treated as discrimination under section 39(7)(b) of the Equality Act 2010, also failed. The tribunal held that the claimant did not resign in response to the one unlawful act it had found, but in response to later events. On remedy, the tribunal made no declaration or recommendation and found that no financial losses flowed from the successful claim. It awarded £8,000 for injury to feelings, placing the award towards the upper end of the lower Vento band.