Paula Barrett Respondent 1: The Governing Body of St Austin’s Catholic School Respondent 2: Liverpool City Council Respondent 3: School Improvement Liverpool Ltd v Respondent — 2020

Paula Barrett alleged sexual harassment arising from an incident on 19 July 2019 involving a school governor at a retirement night out, and she also challenged the handling of her complaint and grievance by school management and HR staff. The tribunal noted that the pleadings were extensive and at points unclear, particularly as to which allegations were pursued against which respondent.

As against Liverpool City Council, the tribunal held that there was no legal basis for liability because the council was not the employer of the HR advisers involved and there was no basis for treating it as responsible for the first respondent's conduct. It therefore dismissed the second respondent's section 26 claim and refused the claimant permission to add a section 112 aiding-contraventions claim against the second respondent.

As against School Improvement Liverpool Ltd, the tribunal declined to strike out the section 26 and section 27 allegations at this preliminary stage, saying it could not conduct a mini-trial on the papers and that the claims were fact-sensitive. It nevertheless described the claims as weak and indicated that a deposit order should be considered after enquiries into the claimant's means. The tribunal allowed the claimant to amend to add a section 112 claim against the third respondent, but again said the pleaded case had little reasonable prospect of success.

The first respondent's vicarious-liability strike-out application was adjourned to the liability hearing by consent. No compensation award was made at this stage; the hearing was confined to strike-out, amendment, consolidation, and deposit-order issues.