Claimant v Firstport Property Services No.14 Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Claim struck out as claimant was not actually told to 'put up with it' in relation to the racially offensive emails. She confirmed this was not said but was her inference from how previous issues were dealt with. The tribunal found this case was bound to fail.
Claim that respondent should have ensured safe and inclusive work environment struck out on legal basis. The Equality Act 2010 does not make an employer liable for third party harassment. Claimant accepted no prior racially offensive conduct from third party before emails, so no indication claimant would be subjected to such conduct.
Claim alleging failure to prevent retaliation or further harm struck out as it was essentially a repetition of the complaint that claimant was told to 'put up with it', which had already been struck out.
Claim that respondent failed to investigate complaints in timely manner allowed to proceed. Tribunal could not say claim was utterly hopeless - arguable that large employer could have done more to support claimant after extremely serious racially offensive emails were sent by third party, particularly when claimant expressed unhappiness about how it was being dealt with.
Claim that respondent failed to provide proper support and protection allowed to proceed as it was essentially the same complaint as the failure to investigate allegation, which was allowed to proceed.
Claim that respondent failed to take disciplinary or corrective action allowed to proceed as it was essentially another way of presenting the same complaint that respondent should have done more than it did, which was allowed to proceed.
Facts
The claimant, a black British African Property Manager, was subjected to racially offensive emails sent by a person at a third party company (Chancery Estates Limited) between 8-11 December 2023. The emails were sent to multiple Firstport employees and copied to the claimant. The respondent's Head of Operations immediately responded making clear the emails were unacceptable and that the respondent would not deal with the sender again. The claimant went off sick on 11 December 2023 and raised concerns with HR about wanting to submit a grievance, but did not ultimately submit one.
Decision
The tribunal struck out three of the six race discrimination allegations on grounds they had no reasonable prospect of success. The struck out claims included allegations the claimant was told to 'put up with it' (which she admitted was not said), that the respondent had a duty to prevent third party harassment (no such legal duty exists), and a repetition of the first allegation. Three remaining allegations about failure to investigate, support, and take corrective action were allowed to proceed to a full hearing.
Practical note
Employers are not automatically liable under the Equality Act 2010 for third party harassment, but may still face discrimination claims if they fail to adequately respond to serious racially offensive incidents when they become aware of them, particularly where the employee expresses dissatisfaction with the employer's response.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1401269/2024
- Decision date
- 9 October 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- real estate
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Property Manager
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No