Mr L Werenowski, Solicitor. Assisted by an Interpreter: Ms M Maniak-Griffiths (Translati v Respondent — 2021

The claimant, Mr Jakub Kolawa, brought a complaint of harassment on grounds of sexual orientation against the second respondent and relied on the first respondent's vicarious liability under s.109 Equality Act 2010. The tribunal held that the harassment complaint against the second respondent was presented out of time. It found no evidence to justify a just and equitable extension, so the complaint was dismissed on limitation grounds.

On the merits, the tribunal accepted that some homophobic name-calling by the second respondent had probably occurred, but it did not accept the claimant's account that this happened on at least 60 occasions or that it had the effects alleged under s.26 Equality Act 2010. The tribunal found the claimant's evidence inconsistent about complaints to management and concluded that he had not shown the conduct created the required hostile or offensive environment. It therefore held that the name-calling, while related to sexual orientation, did not amount to harassment as pleaded.

The tribunal also rejected the claimant's case that the incident on 17 January 2019 was part of the same pattern of homophobic harassment. It found the altercation arose from the claimant's own provocation in the queue to sign out, and that there was no evidence of homophobic words or sexual-orientation motivation in that incident. Because the complaint against the second respondent was dismissed as out of time, the claim against the first respondent also failed, and all complaints were dismissed. The tribunal noted that, had harassment been found, it would have considered the employer's s.109 reasonable-steps defence, but that issue did not alter the outcome.