Claimant v Opico Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Claimant succeeded on 5 allegations of harassment: Mr Woolway's 'witch' comment (December 2020), Mr Woolway's 'shopping for a dress' comment (Spring 2021), Mr Sherwin's WhatsApp video (January 2022), Mr Bedforth's comment on Jeremy Clarkson tweet (January 2023), Mr Bedforth's 'boyfriend' comment (January 2023), and Mr Bedforth's comment about order of parental deaths (March 2023). Complaints about WhatsApp messages from Mr Bedforth failed as not unwanted conduct — claimant reciprocated with similar messages.
Tribunal not satisfied that claimant's sex played a part in her suspension or dismissal. No appropriate actual comparators and tribunal found that suspension and dismissal were due to advice from Peninsula HR consultants, not discriminatory reasons.
Only one complaint to Mr Woolway about Mr Sherwin's WhatsApp video on 12 January 2022 constituted a protected act. Tribunal found no evidence that Mr Woolway was materially influenced by any protected acts when suspending or dismissing the claimant. Real reason was following Peninsula's advice.
Respondent did not conduct a reasonable investigation. Conflicting accounts between claimant and Mr Vernall but other evidence supported claimant's version. Respondent lacked reasonable grounds for belief in guilt. Decision to dismiss fell outside band of reasonable responses. Multiple serious procedural flaws including lack of impartiality, incomplete investigation, failure to interview key witnesses, and no independent review of Peninsula's recommendations.
Tribunal preferred claimant's evidence about the conversation on 7 March 2023. Found it was a debate between colleagues, not gross misconduct. Respondent not entitled to terminate employment without notice.
Facts
Claimant was a female manager at an agricultural machinery distributor. She was suspended and then dismissed for alleged harassment following a grievance by a male colleague, Mr Vernall, about a conversation regarding vasectomy reversals on 7 March 2023. Claimant had previously complained about sexist comments and messages from the Managing Director (Mr Woolway) and Sales Director (Mr Bedforth), including being called a 'witch', comments about shopping for dresses, and offensive WhatsApp content. The dismissal followed a disciplinary process heavily reliant on external HR consultants Peninsula.
Decision
Tribunal found the dismissal unfair and wrongful. The investigation was flawed, biased against the claimant, and the decision to dismiss fell outside the range of reasonable responses. Five allegations of harassment related to sex succeeded, involving comments by senior managers that created an offensive environment and related to gender stereotypes. Direct sex discrimination and victimisation claims failed as the tribunal found the real reason for dismissal was following Peninsula's advice, not the claimant's sex or protected acts.
Practical note
Employers must conduct genuinely independent and thorough investigations, not simply rubber-stamp external consultant recommendations, and a 'traditional' workplace culture does not excuse conduct that amounts to harassment based on gender stereotypes.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2601046/2023
- Decision date
- 26 February 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 7
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Name
- Opico Limited
- Sector
- agriculture
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister