Skip to main content

Insight article

January 10, 2019

Misbehaviour at the office Christmas party?

Litigation involving the antics of misbehaving employees at the office Christmas party have not only shown that sometimes fact is stranger than fiction, but that on occasion the long-awaited Christmas party can go badly wrong.

Whilst it would be hoped that most employees return to work following a Christmas break with nothing more remarkable than the post-Christmas blues, on occasion, employers can be dealing with the fallout from an office party disaster.

Employers can be held vicariously liable for discriminatory acts of employees – even if the event is held off-site and out of normal working hours.

The same can be said for liability for injury to a member of staff inflicted by another. Recently, in the case of Bellman v Northampton Recruitment Limited, the Court of Appeal ruled that a company was vicariously liable for the conduct of its Managing Director at a Christmas party following a physical attack on one of the employees by the MD, leaving the employee severely disabled.

In 2015, in an equally strange set of facts, a claimant brought an unfair dismissal claim in Westlake v ZSL London Zoo. At London Zoo’s Christmas party, zookeeper Ms Westlake got into a fight with a colleague over a love triangle involving another zookeeper. The exact details of the incident were disputed, but one of the individuals was hit in the face with a glass that Ms Westlake was holding. London Zoo decided to dismiss Westlake for fighting with a colleague, with the other member of staff involved given a final written warning. The tribunal stated that since the employer was unable to determine who started the fight, it was legitimate to dismiss both individuals or give both final written warnings – it was unfair to treat them differently. The unfair dismissal claim was upheld, but the tribunal decided to reduce the award to zero because of the conduct of the claimant.

A further example of the perils of the Christmas party is Bhara v Ikea Limited, in which, what is described as a tussle took place between two colleagues. Mr Bhara was dismissed, and it was found that the dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses and was, therefore, fair, even when the employees involved in the incident did not feel it was particularly serious.

These cases are ample demonstration of the perils of the office Christmas party and the potential risks it can pose for employers. If misconduct occurs at the Christmas party, employers should ensure that they conduct a reasonably thorough investigation before any disciplinary action. Furthermore, in advance of the Christmas party, at risk of being accused of being the “Fun Police”, employers should have a clear policy on what standard of behaviour is acceptable and ideally issue a statement to employees in advance of the party to remind all staff.

For further advice and information, contact Karen Cole today.

Note: This is not legal advice; it is intended to provide information of general interest about current legal issues.

Stay in touch

Subscribe to our newsletter

Stay in touch

By completing your details and submitting this form you confirm you are happy for us to send you marketing communications and that you agree to our Website Privacy Policy and Legal Notice and to us using Mailchimp to process your data.


Sending

News/Insight

  • Why is clear contract drafting important?
    How simple contract clauses can protect your business.


    Read more
  • Ensuring equality: A legal guide to responsibilities and compliance
    Understanding equal opportunities in the workplace


    Read more
  • Navigating the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023: What it means for your business
    The Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 (the Act) represents a significant shift in the UK's approach to combating economic crime, improving corporate transparency, and anti-mo


    Read more
  • Blowing kisses, not boundaries
    Tribunal clears air on workplace etiquette.


    Read more
  • Estate planning: How not to make mincemeat of it!
    The High Court has confirmed that a will handwritten on the back of two cardboard food packages is legally binding.


    Read more

What they say...

  • Leann Paris, March 2025
    “From the beginning to the end, the support we have received throughout the case with all the staff members has been far more than we expected, we got kept up to date with every single matter, I have had stressful few years but Charlotte and he

  • C Smith, March 2025
    “As executor of a will it was a relief for a solicitor to act on my behalf as though no disputes it was still a lengthy and complex process. It was dealt with mostly by Charlotte B. who kept me informed at all times. She explained the process c

  • Marc, March 2025
    “RIAA Barker Gillette were engaged to handle a real estate transaction with unusual circumstances. As a non-UK resident unfamiliar with English conveyancing procedures, I felt completely satisfied with the depth of the information and explanati

  • Leigh, March 2025
    “Instructed Martin on my first property purchase. He was a delight to work with, kept me informed and updated regularly. It was an incredibly smooth and quick process. Couldn’t be happier.”

  • Ms Brownell, March 2025
    “Patrick was amazing from start to finish. He made the process so easy, and explained each step in detail ahead of time so I’d understand what would happen and when. He was incredibly organized and noted every detail, calling out things t

Read more
Send this to a friend