 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
 |
Harassment liability proves new burden for employers
North West law firm, Brabners Chaffe Street, warn employers that in a worrying extension of the law, an innocent employer has been held liable for harassment in the workplace.
In the case, (Majravski v Guys and St Thomas NHS Trust) an employee claimed that he had been picked on by his manager who did not like him. She was highly critical of him and abusive to him in front of others. This upset the employee causing him distress. However, he was not injured in any respect. An internal investigation found the manager guilty of homophobic harassment and she was allowed to resign.
Years later the employee sued his employers in the courts basing his claim on the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. The primary aim of this particular act was to prevent stalking but it also allows a victim of harassment to seek compensation. The employee claimed that his employers were answerable for what their manager had done to him since it happened at work.
Andy Cross, head of the employment team at Brabners Chaffe Street, said: "This particular ruling is a worrying one for employers. For example, the time limit for making claims is six years; therefore an employee could still make a claim from an incident which happened back in 1999. For this purpose, there is no clear definition of what "harassment" is, giving greater latitude to the claiming employee. Also, the courts do not normally recognise claims for somebody merely being upset, yet in this case they do.
Another concern for employers is that their liability insurance will probably not cover this type of claim as normally only bodily injury is covered. Therefore in a bad case this could cost them thousands of pounds in damages. I would therefore advise all employers to check with their insurance brokers to make sure they are covered against such a claim."
