In person for evidence Ms Godwin - Solicitor (submissions only) For the v Ms J Coyne – Counsel — 2020

The claimant originally brought unfair dismissal, race discrimination, sex discrimination and breach of contract claims, but by the hearing the live issues were sex discrimination only. The claimant withdrew the victimisation allegation during the evidence stage after being given time to identify the protected act relied on, and the tribunal later refused an application to set that withdrawal aside. It held there was no power to set aside the withdrawal and, in any event, the application was untimely and inconsistent with the overriding objective.

The remaining sex discrimination issues concerned comments by Mr P on 20 May 2017 in the respondent's online chat system and a comment on 23 September 2017 about the claimant's dress. The tribunal held that those incidents formed a continuing act, so the chat comment was in time under section 123 Equality Act 2010. It said that if the chat incident had been out of time it would not have been just and equitable to extend time, because the delay would have prejudiced the respondent.

On the merits, the tribunal accepted that the incidents happened and that they were acts of harassment, but it found the respondent had taken all reasonable steps to prevent this type of conduct. It relied on the company's handbook and harassment policy, induction training, the fact that relevant staff including Mr P had acknowledged the handbook, Mr P's Responsible Behaviour Statement after his April 2017 suspension, and the way the claimant's grievances were investigated and handled. The tribunal therefore found the respondent was not liable for Mr P's acts under section 109 Equality Act 2010 and dismissed both the harassment and direct sex discrimination claims. No compensation or other remedy was awarded.