Miss A McGettigan v Unipart Group and 1 other — 2026

Miss McGettigan brought harassment claims concerning sex and sexual orientation arising from her assignment by Single Resource Limited to work as a warehouse operative at Unipart Group Limited's warehouse. Her whistleblowing claim was withdrawn before the final hearing. The claims against Unipart Group Limited were settled by consent and dismissed on withdrawal.

The Tribunal unanimously dismissed the sex and sexual-orientation harassment claims against Single Resource Limited. It found on the balance of probabilities that the alleged conduct by Mr Hussain, including the alleged comments, following, loitering and sexual gestures, did not occur. It preferred the evidence of the respondent's witnesses, noting among other matters Mr Hussain's limited English, his evidence that he had no Canadian friend at work, and inquiries indicating that no Canadian national worked at the warehouse at the relevant time.

The Tribunal also rejected the allegations involving Ms Birtles and Ms Kolmane. It accepted evidence that Ms Birtles did not call the Claimant “autosexual”, that the Claimant declined an invitation to view CCTV after alleging that Ms Birtles had followed her, and that the meeting following the 28 August 2023 incident involved the Claimant being told her workplace conduct was inappropriate rather than receiving a verbal warning. The Tribunal found that the Claimant's evidence contained inconsistencies, new allegations and matters unsupported by her documentary evidence, and concluded that it was unreliable.

Applying the burden-of-proof provisions in section 136 of the Equality Act 2010, the Tribunal found that the alleged treatment had not occurred at all on the balance of probabilities. The harassment claims therefore failed at the first stage, without any need to consider a non-discriminatory explanation. No monetary remedy was awarded or addressed.