A legal secretary won a sexual harassment claim against her employer following a series of inappropriate incidents involving a senior partner. The tribunal found that the employer’s actions created an intimidating and offensive work environment, resulting in compensation for the employee.
The circumstances behind the Sexual Harassment claim
In the case of Miss M Bratt v JGQC Solicitors Ltd, Megan Bratt, a junior legal secretary, was employed by JGQC Solicitors, based in Nettleham, Lincolnshire, from 4 January 2022, until she resigned on 21 February 2022. Marcus Hall, a senior partner and firm owner, was found to have engaged in conduct that led to Bratt’s resignation.
From the beginning of her employment, Bratt faced unwelcome attention and inappropriate behaviour from Hall. On 25 January 2022, Hall sent Bratt a text message that read, “Hi sweetheart see you in the morning,” followed by two kisses. Recognising the inappropriateness of the message, he deleted it and sent another, acknowledging that the previous message might have been “a bit naughty for a lady.” The following day, Hall publicly claimed the message was intended for his daughter, which only added to Bratt’s discomfort and suspicion about his intentions.
Hall’s conduct continued in this way. He engaged Bratt in graphic conversations about his personal life, particularly about his ex-partner, whom he caught cheating with a 22-year-old police officer. He described finding a used condom on the floor, a detail Bratt found particularly disgusting and offensive. (The tribunal would later describe such discussions about personal relationships as sexual harassment, especially when they create an uncomfortable work environment.)
On 2 February 2022, he commented on Bratt’s appearance, saying she looked “nice” with a “creepy smile” on his face and asked if he was allowed to say it. This comment, especially the implied permission-seeking, made Bratt feel violated and anxious. She even referenced the then-ongoing case of Mason Greenwood, a footballer accused of serious offenses, to caution Hall about his comments. Hall’s dismissive response further exacerbated her discomfort.
On 4 February 2022, while helping Hall with his computer, Bratt saw adverts from dating sites showing women in provocative poses on his Facebook account. This exposure was said to be unintentional on Hall’s part, but the tribunal would still consider it to be unwanted conduct of a sexual nature. Furthermore, on 17 February 2022, Bratt was shown a video of Hall’s girlfriend, Tanya, bending forward in a skirt and blowing a kiss. This, combined with Hall’s previous actions, solidified Bratt’s perception of an unbearable work environment.
The situation developed further on 16 February 2022, when Hall used offensive language in the office, including words with sexual connotations. By this time, Bratt had already decided to leave the firm, as evidenced by her WhatsApp messages to her boyfriend expressing her distress and stating that she wished she was dead.
Bratt raised a grievance however was accused by those conducting it of dressing inappropriately and flaunting herself on social media. A member of the grievance panel, Justine Fletcher, referred to her as a ‘Love Island reject’ and coming to the office as if she were dressed for a night out. Another member of the panel, Shona Nelson, commented that Bratt was ‘faked up with fake tan and false eyelashes’ and asserted that her social media photos were more revealing than the images and videos shown by Mr. Hall.
It was found that these personal attacks, made during the investigation of her grievance, were intended to discredit her complaints and further humiliated her. Bratt’s grievance was not taken seriously, and the tribunal found that the investigation was biased, as it was conducted by staff who had worked with Hall for decades.
The Sexual Harassment Claim
The tribunal found that Hall’s behaviour constituted unwanted conduct of a sexual nature, which violated Bratt’s dignity and created an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment. The tribunal criticised the firm’s inadequate handling of Bratt’s complaints and the inappropriate comments made by her colleagues during the investigation.
Key incidents that supported Bratt’s claim included Hall’s explicit discussions about his personal life, the inappropriate text message, comments about her appearance, and the display of provocative images. The tribunal rejected the firm’s defence that these actions were merely “office banter.”
The tribunal specifically noted the firm’s troubling culture, which allowed such inappropriate behaviour to go unchecked. The investigation into Bratt’s complaints was found to be unfair, with personal attacks on her appearance and social media presence being used to undermine her credibility. This approach by the firm only reinforced the hostile work environment that Bratt had described.
Learning outcomes for employers
Ahead of the upcoming additional duty strengthening the protection of employees against sexual harassment, this case demonstrates the importance of maintaining a professional and respectful work environment. Employers must recognise that behaviours deemed as “banter” can constitute sexual harassment if they create an intimidating or hostile environment for employees. Comprehensive policies, regular training on equality and diversity, and a robust grievance procedure are essential to prevent harassment and ensure all complaints are taken seriously.
Employers are already liable for sexual harassment, however in October they will now be subject to a specific statutory duty to take reasonable steps to prevent harassment, and failure to do so can result in significant legal and financial consequences. Responsible employers should foster a workplace culture where all employees feel safe, respected, and valued.
We’re here to help
We are expecting legislative changes occurring from October 2024 specifically concerning an employer’s obligation to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace.
Watch our latest webinar where we discuss the new obligations around Harassment at work and what they mean for employers.
Subscribe to our newsletter to receive the latest updates on employment law directly to your inbox. Sign up here.
