Harassment in practice?
This exercise asks you to consider what behaviour actuallyamounts to harassment, with reference to two real cases.
Read the case summaries and the questions that follow belowand then discuss these with your groupmates in the forum.
Richmond Pharmacology vs Dhaliwal (2009) IRLR 336
Dhaliwal is of Indian origin and was employed by RichmondPharmacology. In conversation with the medical director of thecompany, he remarked to her “We will probably bump into each otherin future – unless you are married off in India”. Dhaliwal claimedthat this was racial harassment and the Employment Appeal Tribunalagreed.
(Adapted from Daniels, 2016)
Quality Solicitors CMHT vs Tunstall (2014) UKEAT/0105/14
Tunstall is Polish and worked for a solicitors’ firm. Sheoverhead a colleague talking about her to a client who remarked“She is Polish, but she is very nice”. The colleague said that heactually commented “She is Polish, and she is very nice”. Tunstallmade a claim of harassment, arguing that, regardless of the actualwords spoken, an implication had been made that Polish people werenot usually very nice. However, her claim was not successful, asthe Employment Appeal Tribunal did not agree and ruled that thisone comment was insufficient to amount to harassment.
(Adapted from Daniels, 2016)
Please add your thoughts on some of the questions below:
Both cases of harassment related to a single incident. Why doyou think Dhaliwal’s claim was successful while Tunstall’s claimwas unsuccessful?
Do you agree with the EAT’s ruling in the case ofTunstall?
