Veakins v Kier Islington [2009] EWCA Civ 1288

Grapic image of description of bullying

The manager was found to have deliberately harassed the Claimant

Of interest as being the first (re)consideration of Conn v Sunderland. At first instance the conduct was accepted as being capable of being harassment but the claim was dismissed on the grounds that it would not in practice be prosecuted. Relying on Conn, it was held it could not be harassment under the PHA.

The Court of Appeal confirmed that was the wrong test. Conduct has to be serious enough that it would merit a criminal conviction* but the fact the prosecuting authorities would in practice not take action was no reason to dismiss a claim.

*Arguably this remains trite. Either the conduct is serious enough to be harassment or it is not. If it is, it would sustain a criminal charge. If not, it wouldn’t. That is, er, what the PHA says …

Veakins v Kier Islington [2009] EWCA Civ 1288


Leave a comment

Filed under Cases, Harassment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s