---
title: "FC Employment Judgment: Harassment"
description: This judgment focuses on workplace harassment and whether a person can be considered harassed if they are not aware of the unwanted conduct.
---

[FC Blog ](https://blog.fromcounsel.com)

# [FC Employment Judgment: Harassment](https://blog.fromcounsel.com/fc-judgment-greasley-adams-v-royal-mail-group-2023)

 Written by [Sample HubSpot User](https://blog.fromcounsel.com/author/sample-hubspot-user) | Jun 30, 2023 9:09:00 AM

- [***Greasley-Adams v Royal Mail Group Ltd [2023] EAT 86***](https://www.gov.uk/employment-appeal-tribunal-decisions/mr-a-greasley-adams-v-royal-mail-group-ltd-2023-eat-86)

The Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld a decision of the employment tribunal that a person cannot be harassed under the [Equality Act 2010](https://www.fromcounsel.com/employment/legislation/2010+CHAPTER+15:::::?utm_source=ca&utm_campaign=300623&utm_term=JRUJuly2023&utm_content=FCLegislation-EA2010) if they are not aware of the unwanted conduct. The case involved a claimant with Asperger's Syndrome who alleged harassment under [s 26 EA 2010](https://www.fromcounsel.com/employment/legislation/2010+CHAPTER+15::2:2:26:26?utm_source=ca&utm_campaign=300623&utm_term=JRUJuly2023&utm_content=FCLegislation-EA2010s26) and victimisation under [s 27 EA 2010](https://www.fromcounsel.com/employment/legislation/2010+CHAPTER+15::2:2:26:27?utm_source=ca&utm_campaign=300623&utm_term=JRUJuly2023&utm_content=FCLegislation-EA2010s27) related to his disability under [s 6 EA 2010](https://www.fromcounsel.com/employment/legislation/2010+CHAPTER+15::2:1::6?utm_source=ca&utm_campaign=300623&utm_term=JRUJuly2023&utm_content=FCLegislation-EA2010s6).

Under s 26(1), harassment occurs when someone engages in unwanted conduct related to a protected characteristic, which has the purpose of violating the other person's dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment (see [Disability, Q&A here](https://www.fromcounsel.com/employment/full/qa/discri1dis/5AY4kgGMz5?utm_source=ca&utm_campaign=300623&utm_term=JRUJuly2023&utm_content=FCQ%26A-Disability187)). In determining whether harassment has occurred, the perception of the person claiming harassment, the other circumstances of the case and the reasonableness of the conduct's effect must be taken into account (s 26(4)) (see [Disability, Q&A here](https://www.fromcounsel.com/employment/full/qa/discri1dis/l373Zml3Rj?utm_source=ca&utm_campaign=300623&utm_term=JRUJuly2023&utm_content=FCQ%26A-Disability189)).

In this case, the claimant argued that his dignity could be violated even if he was not aware of the unwanted conduct because dignity is how an individual is perceived by others. The EAT rejected this argument and, following [***Pemberton v Inwood*** ***[2018] EWCA Civ 564***](https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2018/564.html), confirmed that perception for the purposes of s 26(4)(a) is to be determined subjectively. In this case, the claimant had no awareness, so there could be no perception of harassment.

The EAT also rejected the claimant's argument that the employment tribunal had erred in considering the reasonableness of the unwanted conduct only in the context that the conduct had come to light, namely the bullying and harassment investigation that had been carried out by the respondent. While the tribunal had considered relevant circumstances, beyond the investigation, the judge confirmed that s 26(4) mandated consideration of the claimant's perception of the conduct, which was in this case only engaged during the bullying and harassment investigation.

[View full post](https://blog.fromcounsel.com/fc-judgment-greasley-adams-v-royal-mail-group-2023)

```json
{
  "@context" : "http://schema.org",
  "@type" : "BlogPosting",
  "author" : {
    "@type" : "Person",
    "name" : "Sample HubSpot User"
  },
  "dateModified" : "2025-07-24T10:17:38.641Z",
  "datePublished" : "2023-06-30T09:09:00Z",
  "headline" : "FC Employment Judgment: Harassment",
  "image" : {
    "@type" : "ImageObject",
    "height" : 900,
    "url" : "https://info.fromcounsel.com/hubfs/Harassment-2.svg",
    "width" : 1600
  },
  "mainEntityOfPage" : "https://blog.fromcounsel.com/fc-judgment-greasley-adams-v-royal-mail-group-2023",
  "publisher" : {
    "@type" : "Organization",
    "logo" : {
      "@type" : "ImageObject",
      "height" : 60,
      "url" : "/hs/hsstatic/content_shared_assets/static-1.4092/img/default-amp-logo.png",
      "width" : 60
    },
    "name" : "FC Blog"
  }
}
```