Guidance

Code of practice for services, public functions and associations: Chapter 8 - Harassment

Published: 5 August 2026

Last updated: 5 August 2026

On this page

Pages in this guide

Downloads

What countries does this apply to?

  • England
  • Scotland
  • Wales

Introduction

  1. This chapter of the code of practice (the Code) explains the general test for harassment in the Equality Act 2010 (the Act). It also explains the provisions on harassment related to a relevant protected characteristic, the provisions on sexual harassment and the provisions on less favourable treatment of people who reject or submit to harassment. In relation to the protected characteristic of sex, the definition is as set out in paragraph 2.88

What the Act says

  1. The Act prohibits three types of harassment. These are:
  • harassment related to a ‘relevant protected characteristic’ (section 26, paragraph 1)
  • sexual harassment (section 26, paragraph 2)
  • less favourable treatment of an individual because they submit to or reject sexual harassment or harassment related to sex or gender reassignment (section 26, paragraph 3)

These are explained in detail in this chapter.

  1. The 'relevant protected characteristics’ for this Code (section 26, paragraph 5) are:
  • age
  • disability
  • gender reassignment
  • race
  • sex
  1. The Act does not prohibit harassment by a service provider or person exercising a public function of people who are under 18 years old (section 28, paragraph 1). This exception does not apply to associations: those under the age of 18 are protected from harassment in this context.
  2. Pregnancy and maternity are not protected directly under the harassment provisions (section 26, paragraph 5). However, pregnancy and maternity harassment would amount to harassment related to sex.
  3. The prohibition of harassment as described in this chapter does not protect individuals who have the protected characteristics of sexual orientation or religion or belief (section 29, paragraph 8, section 103, paragraph 2). However, where unwanted conduct related to either of these protected characteristics results in a person suffering a detriment, that person may be able to bring a claim of direct discrimination (section 212, paragraph 5) (read Chapter 4).

Harassment related to a protected characteristic

  1. This type of harassment occurs when a service provider, person exercising a public function or association engages in unwanted conduct which is related to a relevant protected characteristic (section 26, paragraph 1(a)), and which has the purpose or the effect of:
  • violating an individual’s dignity, or
  • creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for an individual (section 26, paragraph 1(b))
  1. Conduct that has one of these effects can be harassment even if the effect was not intended. For more information, read about ‘purpose or effect’ in paragraphs 8.16 to 8.22.

Example:

  1. A publican continually refers to an older man as ‘dinosaur’ in front of other customers when serving him in a pub. It is likely that the man would succeed in a harassment claim if he was able to persuade the court that the conduct had the purpose or effect of violating his dignity or of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for him. In determining whether the conduct has had such an effect, it would be necessary to consider the perception of the customer, whether it is reasonable for the conduct to have that effect and the other circumstances of the case.

The meaning of ‘unwanted conduct’

  1. Unwanted conduct covers a wide range of behaviour, including:
  • spoken or written words or abuse
  • ‘banter’ (teasing or joking talk that is intended to be humorous or friendly)
  • imagery
  • graffiti
  • physical gestures
  • facial expressions
  • mimicry
  • jokes
  • pranks
  • acts affecting a person’s surroundings or other physical behaviour
  1. This behaviour could be face-to-face, on the phone, in text messages or online, for example through social media or online chat. Unwanted conduct also includes inaction by a service provider, person exercising a public function or association, if that inaction is related to a protected characteristic.Footnote 1

Example:

  1. A leisure centre manager is at reception with a colleague. A gym user arrives and the colleague makes fun of their afro hairstyle in front of other gym users. The gym user looks upset and walks away. The manager doesn’t say anything because they consider the comment was banter.

    The manager’s failure to do anything about their colleague's comments could amount to harassment. Hairstyles adopted by specific ethnic groups may be related to race. The manager’s inaction could have contributed towards violating the gym user’s dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for them.
  1. The word unwanted means essentially the same as ‘unwelcome’ or ‘uninvited’ and means ‘unwanted by the recipient’. It should be considered from their subjective point of view. However, external factors may be considered by a court in deciding whether it accepts that, subjectively, the conduct was unwanted.
  2. It is not necessary for any objection to be made to the conduct for it to be ‘unwanted’. However, when determining whether conduct was unwanted, a court may take account of whether there was an objection (amongst other things). A serious one-off incident can amount to harassment.

Example:

  1. Two male shop assistants loudly commented on the size of a female shopper’s breasts. This could amount to harassment. Such comments could be self-evidently unwanted, and she would not have to object to it before it was deemed to be unlawful harassment.

'Purpose or effect'

  1. Regardless of any intended purpose, for all three types of harassment set out in paragraph 8.2, if subjecting the individual to the unwanted conduct has the effect of violating the individual’s dignity, or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for them, this will be sufficient to establish unlawful harassment. The intended purpose or motive behind the conduct is irrelevant.

Example:

  1. Racist jokes among hospital staff while on duty may violate the dignity of, or create a hostile, degrading or humiliating environment for, a hospital patient or a visitor to the hospital who overhears these comments, even though this conduct was not directed at the patient or visitor themselves.

Example:

  1. A club has an instant messaging group for its committee members. The club manager sends some jokes in the messaging group that are derogatory towards women. It is not the club manager’s purpose to offend or humiliate anyone in the group. However, this may amount to harassment where the effect of the jokes creates a humiliating or offensive environment for a man or woman in the group.
  1. In deciding whether conduct has the effect of creating any of the circumstances defined in paragraph 8.16, the following points 1) to 3) must be considered (section 26, paragraph 4).

 

  1. The perception of the individual (section 26, paragraph 4(a)); did they regard it as violating their dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for them? This part of the test is a subjective question and depends on how the individual regards the conduct. If the individual does not perceive their dignity to have been violated, or an adverse environment created, then the conduct should not be found to have the effect described in paragraph 8.7.Footnote 2
  2. The other circumstances of the case (section 26, paragraph 4(b)). Circumstances that may be relevant and need to be considered can include:
    • the personal circumstances of the individual experiencing the conduct, for example, their health, including mental health, their mental capacity, cultural background, race or ethnicity, religion, belief or previous experience of harassment
    • the environment where the conduct took place, for example, where the service provider, person exercising a public function or association is in a position of trust with the individual, or holds any other form of power over them
    • whether the conduct was within an organisation or institution where there is a regular and continuing relationship between that organisation or institution and the individual, such as a hospital or residential care establishment, community home or a prison
    • whether the conduct was intended to cause offence, as conduct that is obviously intended to cause offence is much more likely to be found to have the effect described in paragraph 8.7Footnote 3
  3. Whether it is reasonable for the conduct to have that effect (section 26, paragraph 4(c)); this is an objective test.
    Courts are unlikely to find that the unwanted conduct has the effect of, for example, offending a service user if the court considers the service user to be hypersensitive and that another person subjected to the same conduct would not have been offended.

 

  1. It is relevant to consider whether the alleged harasser is exercising any other rights. For example, if they are expressing an opinion related to a religious or philosophical belief, they may be protected from discrimination and harassment because of or related to that belief. For further information about the protected characteristic of religion and belief, read paragraphs 2.70 to 2.86.
  2. It is also relevant to consider whether the alleged harasser was exercising any of their convention rights protected under the Human Rights Act 1998. For example, the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, or the right to freedom of speech of the alleged harasser will need to be taken into account when considering all relevant circumstances of the case.
  3. Public authorities also have a duty under the Human Rights Act 1998 not to act incompatibly with rights under the European Convention on Human Rights. Even where the alleged harasser is not a public authority, the court or tribunal must ensure that it interprets the Act compatibly with Convention rights where it can (read paragraphs 1.18 to 1.21).

The meaning of 'related to'

  1. Unwanted conduct ‘related to’ a relevant protected characteristic has a broad meaning. It can include many situations, such as those described in paragraphs 8.24 to 8.34.
  2. Harassment can be related to an individual’s own protected characteristic.

Example:

  1. A woman using the gym equipment in her local leisure centre is subjected to comments from male staff members such as ‘watch what you say in front of her, it’s her time of the month again’. This could amount to harassment.
  1. Protection from harassment also applies where a person is generally abusive, but, in relation to a particular individual, the form of the unwanted conduct relates to that individual's protected characteristic.

Example:

  1. A hairdresser is often rude to his customers but regards his comments as friendly banter. For example, he often makes rude comments about customers’ jobs, weight, height and where they are from. Comments about jobs, weight or height are unlikely to be unlawful because they are unlikely to relate to a protected characteristic. However, a rude comment about where someone is from could relate to race and may amount to harassment if a customer finds the comments humiliating or offensive. It does not matter that the hairdresser is rude to all his customers and did not intend to offend a particular individual.
  1. An individual does not have to possess the relevant protected characteristic themselves for protection from harassment to arise. This can happen in several different situations.

 

  1. An individual may be associated with someone who has a protected characteristic.

Example:

A party of adults with learning difficulties have a meal in a restaurant accompanied by their support workers. Some of the restaurant staff make fun of the party with gestures and silently mimicking them. The support workers are very upset by the conduct of the staff for creating a degrading and humiliating environment for them, as well as for the adults they support. The support workers could bring a claim of harassment related to disability.

  1. An individual may be wrongly perceived as having a particular protected characteristic.

Example:

A trans woman using the gym equipment in her local leisure centre is subjected to comments from male staff members such as ‘watch what you say in front of her, it’s her time of the month again’. As with the example at 8.25, this could amount to harassment. However, in this example, the harassment would be related to the trans woman’s perceived sex.

  1. An individual may be known not to have a particular protected characteristic but nevertheless is subjected to harassment related to that characteristic.

Example:

A member of staff at a local shop mocks a teenage boy with long hair for being trans when he comes in. The boy now really dislikes going to the shop, especially with his friends as he dreads being insulted and verbally abused. The staff member knows the boy is not trans, and he regards this name calling as just a joke, but this could amount to harassment related to gender reassignment. 

  1. Protection from harassment can arise where the unwanted conduct related to a protected characteristic is not directed at a particular individual, but at another person or nobody.

Example:

  1. A waiter in a restaurant racially abuses a Black customer. As a result of the racial abuse, a White customer is offended and could bring a claim of racial harassment.
  1. Protection from harassment applies where conduct is not overtly because of a protected characteristic but is associated with it.

Example:

  1. A Sikh man wearing a Kara bracelet walks past two young staff members stacking shelves in a shop. They stare at him as he walks past and then speak to each other making fun of the fact he is wearing a bracelet, within earshot of the Sikh man. The Kara bracelet is related to his Sikh ethnicity, so this could amount to harassment related to race.
  1. Protection from harassment applies where conduct is not overtly because of a protected characteristic, but the motives of the harasser mean that it is related to it.

Example:

  1. A male library user complains to the library manager that a female librarian has made sexual advances towards him. The manager decides not to conduct a formal investigation into the complaint. She does not take the complaint seriously because it has been raised by a man. The manager’s failure to conduct a formal investigation is related to the offender’s sex and could amount to harassment related to sex.Footnote 4

Sexual harassment

  1. Sexual harassment occurs when a person engages in unwanted conduct of a sexual nature, which has either the purpose or effect described in paragraph 8.7 (section 26, paragraph 2). The concept of ‘unwanted conduct’ is explained in paragraphs 8.10 to 8.15.
  2. Conduct ‘of a sexual nature’ can cover verbal, non-verbal or physical conduct, including:
  • unwelcome sexual comments or questions
  • sexual advances
  • staring or leering
  • touching
  • gestures
  • sexual assault
  • sexual jokes
  • displaying sexual or erotic videos, photographs, drawings or images
  1. Sexual harassment can happen face-to-face, in phone calls, text messages or online, such as on social media or online chat.
  2. Conduct of a sexual nature can be from someone of the same or opposite sex. Conduct that was welcomed in the past may become unwanted, for example where two people had a sexual relationship in the past, which has now ended.

Example:

  1. A woman enters a car garage to find three male staff members sitting at a computer watching a social media video with topless women in it. The video is in full view of the customer and the garage staff are laughing and making lewd comments about the video. This could create an offensive, intimidating or degrading environment for the female customer and could therefore amount to sexual harassment.

Less favourable treatment for rejecting or submitting to unwanted conduct

  1. The third type of harassment occurs when an individual is treated less favourably by a service provider, person exercising a public function or association, because that individual has submitted to, or rejected, unwanted conduct of a sexual nature, or unwanted conduct which is related to sex or gender reassignment, and the unwanted conduct creates any of the circumstances defined in paragraph 8.7 for them (section 26, paragraph 3).
  2. Under this type of harassment, it may be the same person who is responsible for the initial unwanted conduct and subsequent unfavourable treatment, or it may be a different person (section 26, paragraph 3(a)).

Example:

  1. A female prisoner rejects sexual advances and unwanted touching by a male prison officer. The prison officer subsequently recommends to the assistant governor that her hours of paid work be reduced and the assistant governor acts on the recommendation. This could amount to less favourable treatment for rejecting unwanted conduct.

Example:

  1. A female member of an athletics club tolerates or accepts the sexual joking of another member, even though it is unwanted. The club’s social secretary decides not to invite her to social events after observing her accept the sexual joking. This could amount to less favourable treatment for submitting to unwanted conduct.

Statutory defence

Liability of employers and principals

  1. Employers and principals (as service providers, persons exercising a public function or associations) can comply with the Act and so avoid liability for harassment carried out by their employees or agents if they take all reasonable steps to prevent harassment occurring (section 109, paragraph 4). Read paragraphs 3.36 to 3.49 for further detail.

Document downloads

Code of practice for services, public functions and associations

PDF, 1.69 MB, 342 pages

Footnotes

  • Footnote 1

    Conteh v Parking Partners Ltd [2011] EqLR 332

  • Footnote 2

    Pemberton v Inwood [2018] ICR 1291

  • Footnote 3

    Grant v HM Land Registry [2011] EWCA Civ 769

  • Footnote 4

    Unite the Union v Nailard [2018] EWCA Civ 1203

Page updates

Published:

5 August 2026

Last updated:

5 August 2026