AB v Grafters Group Ltd: redefining the boundaries of workplace harassment

The Employment Appeal Tribunal’s decision in AB v Grafters Group Ltd [2025] EAT 126 serves as an important reminder for employers: liability for sexual harassment is not confined to the four walls of the physical workplace. The case reinforces that the scope of “in the course of employment” under the Equality Act 2010 can extend to a much broader range of work-related activities—including those that occur off-site and outside formal working hours.

Background: a lift to work with legal consequences

The facts of the case centre on an employee (AB), who was subjected to sexual harassment during a car journey to work. The lift was offered by a colleague, and although the journey itself was not part of AB’s contractual duties, it was a regular arrangement linked to their shared employment. During one commute, AB experienced unwanted and inappropriate conduct from the colleague, which she later reported to her employer.

Grafters Group Ltd initially dismissed the complaint on the basis that the alleged harassment occurred outside the workplace and outside working hours. The employer argued that it was not responsible for conduct that took place in a private vehicle, before the working day had officially begun. However, the tribunal took a very different view.

The Tribunal’s reasoning: expanding “in the course of employment”

The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that the harassment did occur “in the course of employment” for the purposes of section 109 of the Equality Act 2010. The journey to work, though informal, was directly connected to the employment relationship. It was a regular and foreseeable arrangement between colleagues, and the employer had knowledge of it. Crucially, the tribunal found that the context of the harassment (being en route to work with a colleague) was sufficiently work-related to trigger employer liability.

This interpretation aligns with previous case law, including Jones v Tower Boot Co Ltd [1997] IRLR 168, which established that “in the course of employment” should be interpreted broadly in discrimination cases. The tribunal reaffirmed that the test is not limited to acts occurring on the employer’s premises or during working hours but includes any situation where the employment relationship is a material factor in the conduct.

Key takeaways

The decision in AB v Grafters Group Ltd has significant implications for employers across sectors. It underscores the importance of recognising that workplace harassment can occur in settings that are not traditionally considered part of the workplace. This includes:

• Commutes arranged between colleagues
• Work-related social events
• Off-site meetings or training sessions
• Online communications linked to work

Employers must ensure that their harassment policies and training programmes reflect this broader understanding. It is not sufficient to focus solely on conduct within the office or during working hours. Instead, employers should take proactive steps to educate staff about appropriate behaviour in all work-related contexts and ensure that complaints are taken seriously regardless of where the conduct occurred.

It is also important to consider this decision in light of the amendments to sexual harassment law introduced in October 2024by The Worker Protection (Amendment of Equality Act 2010) Act 2023. This legislation introduced a proactive duty on employers to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment of their workers and employees. The guidance issued by the Equality and Human Rights Commission confirms that this proactive duty covers taking reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment by third parties.

Taking into account the broad interpretation of the “workplace”, employers will need to be very mindful of all work-related contexts where staff come into contact with third parties and ensure that they have carried out appropriate risk assessments and taken reasonable steps to address any identified risks.

Following this ruling and considering the current law, employers should:

• Review and update harassment policies to clarify that liability may extend beyond the physical workplace and extends to prevent sexual harassment from third parties.
• Identify any risks of sexual harassment in their working environment, including in relation to third parties.
• Train managers and staff to recognise that work-related interactions, whether in a car, at a pub, or online, can fall within the scope of employment law protections.
• Investigate all complaints thoroughly, even if the alleged conduct occurred off-site or outside normal hours.
• Avoid dismissing complaints based on location or timing alone.

AB v Grafters Group Ltd [2025] EAT 126 is an interesting case that should serve to remind employers that employer liability for harassment is not geographically confined. The employment relationship itself creates a duty of care that extends into many aspects of working life. Employers who fail to recognise this risk not only risk reputational damage but also legal liability. In today’s evolving workplace, awareness and vigilance are essential. For expert legal advice on employment law, contact the Geldards Employment Team below