Discrimination can occur even when a comment is in writing and discovered by an employee a long time after the comment was written down, as this case illustrates.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that an employer discriminated against a gay employee when it implemented a re-positioning policy, for a pub, that discriminated against gay customers.
In this case, an employment tribunal found that a gay employee was harassed at a workplace event that he could not opt out of and that lent itself to banter of a sexual nature that could easily offend.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that an employment tribunal that held that an employee had been discriminated against on the ground of sexual orientation had failed properly to take into account, among other facts, that the employee had actively “come out” while working at a different office.
In English v Thomas Sanderson Blinds [2008] EWCA Civ 1421 CA, the Court of Appeal held that alleged homophobic abuse towards a man who is not gay, and aware that the perpetrators did not believe him to be gay, amounts to harassment on the grounds of sexual orientation.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that an employment tribunal was not wrong to hold that a claim was out of time and there was no continuing act of discrimination. Nor was it wrong not to exercise its discretion to hear the claim on just and equitable grounds.
A recent decision of the European Court of Justice may result in the UK having to amend its sexual orientation laws in relation to pensions. Although the main points at issue in the case are already covered by legislation in the UK, the application of the Barber temporal restriction may have an impact on public sector schemes.