Case 4123430/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A Diop v Standard Care Recruitment Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 4123430/2018
- Decision date
- 15 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Kemp
- Venue
- Edinburgh
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs A Diop
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs Awa Diop worked for Standard Care Recruitment Limited from 2 June 2018 to 4 September 2018. The tribunal accepted her evidence as honest and reliable, and found that after the first two weeks Mr Casey Aigbie, understood by the claimant to be the respondent's principal shareholder, director and manager, began making unwanted sexual advances. The text messages included references to love, marriage, dowry, hugging and endearments, and the claimant made clear that she did not want a relationship and wished only to work.
The tribunal held that this conduct amounted to direct sex discrimination and harassment. It found that the behaviour was because of sex, that it was inherent in the acts complained of, and that a male employee would not have been treated in the same way. Applying the harassment provisions, it held that the conduct in fact created an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment, and that it was reasonable for the claimant to experience it that way. The tribunal also noted that there was no contrary evidence from the respondent, which had not appeared at the hearing.
On dismissal, the tribunal held that the claimant was constructively dismissed under section 39(7)(b) of the Equality Act 2010. It found a fundamental breach of contract, linking the resignation not only to the unwanted sexual conduct and harassment but also to the failure to pay wages when due. The claimant resigned with immediate effect on 4 September 2018 and did not unduly delay. The tribunal also found that no payment had been made for accrued annual leave.
On remedy, the tribunal awarded £8,000 for injury to feelings, placing the case at the top end of the lower Vento band as updated for claims presented on or after 6 April 2018. It awarded £11,151 for loss of earnings, calculated by reference to 27 weeks to 28 January 2019, when an unrelated foot operation would in any event have caused absence from work, and it declined to make any future loss award because the evidence was limited. It also awarded £840 for unpaid holiday pay. The total award was £19,991.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | The tribunal found that Mr Casey Aigbie's unwanted sexual pursuit of the claimant, including references to marriage and dowry and repeated terms of endearment, was direct discrimination because of sex. It held the conduct was inherent in the acts complained of and, in any event, that a male employee would not have been treated in this way. The discrimination formed part of a global award of £19,151, but the judgment did not apportion that sum between the discrimination, harassment and dismissal findings. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Harassment | The same course of conduct was held to be unwanted conduct related to sex that created an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. The tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence and found her reaction to be reasonable. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Constructive dismissal | The tribunal held that the claimant's resignation on 4 September 2018 amounted to a dismissal under section 39(7)(b) of the Equality Act 2010. It found a fundamental breach arising from the discriminatory conduct and harassment, together with the non-payment of wages, and held that the claimant resigned without undue delay. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal accepted that the claimant had accrued 84.1 hours of annual leave which had not been paid, and awarded £840 for unpaid holiday pay. It found that she had worked 697 hours at £10 per hour and that the earlier wage arrears had later been settled. | Upheld | — | £840 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £19,991
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £11,151
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
11 references- Amnesty International v Ahmed
- Nagarajan v London Regional Transport
- Shamoon v Chief Constable of the RUC
- Pemberton v Inwood
- Igen v Wong
- Madarassy v Nomura International Plc
- Laing v Manchester City Council
- Ayodele v Citylink Ltd
- Efobi v Royal Mail Group
- s.39(7)(b) Equality Act 2010 / s.95(1)(c) ERA 1996
- Vento bands
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.