In this article, Trinity Employment, Business & Property barrister, Anu Kaura explores the new duty of employers to proactively prevent sexual harassment in the workplace.
Introduction: the new duty to prevent harassment
When the Equality Act 2010 was amended to introduce a new duty on employers to prevent sexual harassment, the change was widely welcomed but, in many quarters, quietly underestimated.
The new duty, which came into force in October 2024, requires employers to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment before it occurs.
Unlike previous frameworks, this is not satisfied by having policies on paper or reacting appropriately after an incident. It is a proactive, anticipatory obligation, focused squarely on prevention.
Why the impact is emerging now
Over the course of 2024 and into 2025, it has become increasingly clear that the real impact of this duty is only now filtering through into workplaces and disputes. That is particularly evident in relation to workplace culture, informal interaction and social events, areas which have historically sat in a grey zone between “work” and “not quite work”.
Christmas parties and social events: a case in point
Christmas parties and end-of-year events provide a timely illustration. For many employers, these are well-intentioned efforts to reward staff and build morale. For others, they have become a source of genuine anxiety. Some organisations have gone as far as cancelling events altogether, concerned about harassment risk and potential liability. The law requires foresight and evidence, not blunt measures.
What reasonable steps look like
The preventative duty means that employers must now be able to demonstrate that they have considered the risk of sexual harassment in advance and taken reasonable steps to mitigate it. That includes assessing:
- The nature of the event
- The environment in which it will take place
- The role of alcohol
- Expectations around attendance and behaviour
- Adequacy of guidance and training provided beforehand
Importantly, the focus is not on eliminating all risk. Tribunals are well aware that workplaces involve human interaction and that social events cannot be entirely risk-free. The question is whether the employer took reasonable steps in the circumstances.
Increasing scrutiny and cultural shifts
What is changing is the level of scrutiny. Practices that were once treated as informal or peripheral are now more clearly within scope. Events described as “optional” may still carry implicit expectations to attend. Behaviour dismissed as “out of character” or “banter” may be re-evaluated through the lens of prevention. A failure to intervene early, or to set clear boundaries, may attract criticism even where no prior complaint has been made.
Implications for employers and advisers
The new duty also has implications beyond headline incidents. How employers handle complaints arising from social events, how seriously concerns are taken, and how consistently standards are enforced will all feed into the assessment of whether reasonable preventative steps were taken.
For advisers, this shift has practical consequences:
- Harassment risk should be considered as part of wider cultural and organisational decision-making
- Contemporaneous evidence matters - showing risks were identified and steps taken will often be critical
Finally, these issues are increasingly surfacing earlier in disputes. Claims and grievances are more likely to focus on what the employer did to prevent harassment, rather than solely on the incident itself.
Power imbalance and credibility
Recent Tribunal decisions demonstrate an increasingly nuanced and realistic approach to how sexual harassment is experienced, particularly where there is a significant imbalance of power. Tribunals are moving away from expectations of immediate objection and recognising the psychological impact of shock, fear and professional vulnerability.
Case example: Obiagwu v Greystoke and Pantheon International Advisors Ltd : the Tribunal found that Anita Obiagwu, a 29-year-old corporate projects executive, was sexually harassed by Andrew Greystoke, an 83-year-old senior lawyer and director, during a work trip to Nice. After a client dinner where alcohol was consumed, Greystoke invited her to his hotel room under the pretext of a business debrief. While she worked on her laptop, he rubbed her arm and back, made explicit sexual remarks, and asked about her response to his advances.
The Tribunal emphasised the significant age and power imbalance, noting that such a disparity made any belief that his overtures were welcome “very improbable.” It accepted that Ms Obiagwu’s reaction, freezing in shock and fear, was consistent with harassment and rejected arguments that her delayed reporting undermined credibility and stressed that victims often do not complain immediately and that this does not negate inappropriate conduct.
The Tribunal also criticised outdated practices, such as inviting junior staff to hotel rooms, and awarded £20,000 for injury to feelings, citing the abuse of trust, emotional trauma, and the seriousness of the misconduct.
Extending the workplace beyond office hours
A similar shift can be seen in the expanding scope of vicarious liability for harassment occurring outside traditional working hours.
Case example: AB v Grafters Group Ltd; AB v Grafters Group Ltd : the Employment Appeal Tribunal ruled that a post-work car journey could still be considered “in the course of employment,” even without employer knowledge, challenging the assumption that liability ends outside the workplace.
The decision underscores that liability for harassment can extend beyond the office and formal working hours. Employers should not assume risk ends at the workplace door; social events, travel arrangements, and informal interactions may still fall “in the course of employment.” This makes proactive measures; clear policies, scenario-based training, and documented risk assessments; essential to demonstrate compliance with the new preventative duty.
Why this matters now
These cases sit squarely within the context of the new statutory duty introduced in 2024 requiring employers to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment. They illustrate why prevention cannot be limited to written policies or reactive investigations. With Christmas parties and client events, organisations should resist the temptation to retreat from social interaction entirely. A more effective response lies in culture, scenario-based training, assessing risk, defining clear expectations of senior leaders, and early intervention when boundaries begin to blur.