The case of Munchkins Restaurant Ltd and anor v Karmazyn and ors is authority for the fact that where a claimant participated in sexual banter in the workplace, this does not preclude a tribunal going on to find that he or she suffered sexual harassment. The facts behind this case were as follows. Karmazyn and her three fellow claimants worked as waitresses at Munchkins Restaurant Ltd , a restaurant in London. The claimants were aged between 23 and 32, and all attracted the attention of the 73-year-old controlling shareholder of, and ‘driving force’ behind, Munchkins Restaurant Ltd. He would often make sexual comments to the claimants and ask them questions about their sex lives. He would also show the claimants ‘dirty’ photographs he kept in the safe and catalogues of sex toys and gadgets that he brought into work. Nevertheless, the claimants worked at the restaurant for periods of between one and five years.
When the assistant manager became too ill to work in the restaurant in 2007, matters came to a head. Karmazyn, who had been acting-up as assistant manager, resigned on 1 July 2007 as she found being first in the shareholder’s firing line too much to bear. The other three claimants soon followed, all of them citing his behaviour among the reasons for their departure. The claimants brought complaints of sex discrimination, harassment and constructive dismissal against him and their employer, the restaurant.
Although the respondents admitted that there had been a degree of sexualised talk in the restaurant, they contended that it had not been unwelcome, and had often been initiated by the claimants. However, the tribunal was not convinced, finding that, by questioning the claimants about sex and showing them explicit photographs and catalogues, the shareholder had, on the ground of their sex, engaged in unwanted conduct that had the effect of violating their dignity and creating an intimidating, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for them.
The tribunal therefore upheld the claims of discrimination and harassment, and also concluded that the claimants had been constructively dismissed.
This case shows that where a claimant participated in sexual banter in the workplace, this does not preclude a tribunal going on to find that he or she suffered sexual harassment. Contact me if you have any questions on this subject.
Comments