The Liability Of Employers For Harassment Committed By Employees
As a consequence of the recently decided House of Lords case Majrowski –v- Guy’s and St Thomas’s NHS Trust, an employer may be vicariously liable for breach of a statutory duty imposed on its employees. The Protection from Harassment Act prohibits an individual from pursuing a course of conduct which amounts to harassment of another or which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other. The Act does not expressly or impliedly exclude such vicarious liability. Accordingly, an employer may become liable for the acts of harassment committed by an employee.
In this particular case Mr Majrowski complained to his employer that he was being intimidated, bullied and harassed by his manager. The Trust investigated the allegations and concluded that harassment had occurred.
The House of Lords, the highest appeal court, decided unanimously that employers may be vicariously liability for employees’ acts of harassment. The legislation does not define harassment but it includes situations in which the victim is caused anxiety or distress . It is not necessary for the victim to demonstrate psychiatric injury. Furthermore the victim has a period of six years in which to bring a claim. The House of Lords stressed that the conduct complained of must be oppressive and unacceptable, of an order that would sustain criminal liability under the Act. Mere unreasonable conduct will not result in liability. In so holding, the House of Lords stressed that the courts should recognise the boundary between conduct that is unattractive and conduct that is unlawful. It is important to note that it will not assist an employer to demonstrate that all reasonable steps were taken to prevent the harassment taking place. Liability under the Act is strict. If bullying and harassment has occurred and is proved, then if that wrongful conduct was so closely connected with acts that the employee was authorised to do, the employer will be liable in respect of same.