City banker who claimed a female executive groped him at party in London loses sex harassment case

A City banker has lost a sex harassment case after he accused a female executive of groping him at a Christmas party.

The male analyst claimed the woman ‘touched his inner thigh’ while they chatted at a bar then ‘firmly’ grabbed his bottom and invited him back to her hotel room.

She allegedly said there was an old saying in France which allows wives to do ‘pretty much what they want with other men’ while their husbands look after their children.

The London-based man, whose identity cannot be revealed due to legal reasons, tried to sue French international bank Credit Agricole for sexual harassment.

But he lost his case at an employment tribunal because his claim was three and a half years out of date.

The London-based man, whose identity cannot be revealed due to legal reasons, tried to sue French international bank Credit Agricole (pictured, its office) for sexual harassment

The alleged harassment happened on Liverpool Street in December 2016, but the analyst only launched his case in September 2020 after he was sacked for performance-related reasons.

The banker, named as ‘MJS’ in legal papers, had until March 2017 before the time limit expired, the tribunal said.

He also lost claims of race discrimination against Credit Agricole – the world’s biggest cooperative financial institution – because they were three years out of date.

The London Central tribunal heard the father of two attended the firm’s Christmas party at a London bar in December 2016 and alleged he was harassed by ‘Ms L’.

A tribunal report said: ‘He said he was standing making light conversation with two male colleagues when they were approached by a senior colleague, referred to as Ms L. Upon seeing Ms L approaching, he says his male colleagues left.

‘His case is that Ms L initially made general conversation with him and then asked him whether he had children and whether he was married. He replied that he had children but was not married.

‘His case is that Ms L proceeded to touch his inner thighs whilst engaging in conversation and that he ‘shuffled back just enough so she couldn’t touch me’.

‘He said that she then said that she was staying at a hotel in London and that in France there was an old saying that whilst the husbands are indoors looking after the children, the wives could pretty much do what they wanted with other men.

‘He alleged that she proceeded to touch him again on the side of his buttocks and firmly grabbed him and he made excuses to get another drink and went downstairs.’

It was heard Ms L did not further proposition him, touch him, or retaliate to his rejection.

MJS complained to his line manager in December 2016 then to HR the next month, and later raised concerns to another boss.

But he never formalised the complaints by putting them in writing to be investigated.

At the end of 2018 and throughout the start of 2019, MJS was repeatedly given warnings over his absences and by September in 2019, he had taken 26 days off, eight of which were unauthorised.

It was also heard he was considered an ‘under-performer’ and caused a loss of £500,000 by incorrectly processing funding deals.

He acted ‘aggressively’ and made ‘threats’ during a meeting in September 2019 then was sacked in June 2020 for aggressive conduct, unauthorised absences and insubordination for failure to carry out instructions.

The report added: ‘He reacted very badly to his dismissal.

‘Instead of submitting in an appeal he telephoned (HR manager) William Le Prado in a manner which we find was aggressive, unpleasant and threatening.

‘This included saying he knew where Mr Le Prado worked and where he lived and that he was ‘coming for him’, that he would ‘get him sacked’ and would ‘f****** destroy him’ and he would post things online.

‘Mr Le Prado was sufficiently intimidated and concerned that he reported the matter to the police.’

At the tribunal, MJS argued despite his sex harassment case being out of time it was still valid. ‘Just because it was out of time, did not mean it did not happen’, he said.

But Employment Judge Elliott ruled MJS’s sex harassment claim could not succeed.

Judge Elliott said: ‘His claim was presented on September 15 2020. The primary time limit expired on or about March 10 2017. The claim is 3.5 years out of time.’

He did not make a finding on whether it actually happened and rejected MJS’s suggestion the single incident was linked to his continued treatment.

Judge Elliott found MJS, who is black, was subjected to ‘offensive’ language with the use of the term ‘monkey’, but it was heard he freely used the word himself positively.

MJS was also offended when he found a list of ‘cockney racist words’ written by his line manager. But his race claim was again ruled as out of time.

***
Read more at DailyMail.co.uk