Sexual harassment

Case 13: The facts

Ms Brumfitt was a corporal in the RAF. She complained about the conduct of a senior colleague who used a substantial number of offensive and obscene remarks, directed at both male and female personnel. The RAF did not deal adequately with her complaint, and Brumfitt claimed that this amounted to sexual harassment.

The ruling

The EAT held that, in a claim of direct discrimination (including sexual harassment), it is necessary to have a male comparator, whether actual or hypothetical. In this case, Brumfitt could not establish that she had been discriminated against on account of her sex, because the offensive conduct was not directed towards her or even towards women generally - it could be equally offensive to men.

The same applied to the RAF's failure to deal adequately with her complaint - she could not establish that this failure occurred because she was a woman.

Brumfitt v MOD and Fitzpatrick UKEAT/1004/03