10th September 2010
-
This month
-
Legal updates
- Agency workers – yes and, er no
- Counting expired warnings
- Homophobic banter not grounds for a successful claim
-
Case archive
Enquiries
T: +44 (0) 1451 812 225
Homophobic banter not grounds for a successful claim
English vs Thomas Sanderson Blinds
EAT/0556/07/LA
Key facts
English was subjected to sexual innuendo by his colleagues who based their harassment on English’s attending a boarding school as a child and the fact that he lived in Brighton. Crucially, English isn’t gay and his colleagues did not truly believe that he was.
Decision
The EAT found that English could not bring a claim under the 2003 Sexual Orientation Regulations because these only give protection to those suffering because of their actual sexual orientation, because of their perceived sexual orientation, because of the sexual orientation of their family members, or because they failed to discriminate against another on the grounds of their sexual orientation. Because everyone accepted that English was not gay, he couldn’t be protected under the narrow definition of these regulations.
Our view
The EC Equal Treatment Framework Directive would seem to have been misapplied and the 2003 Sexual Orientation Regulations are likely to be reviewed. In English’s case, he would probably have won a case brought under the Protection from Harassment Act which gives a much wider definition to cover the mistreatment that his colleagues undoubtedly gave him.
