The Sexual Orientation Regulations prohibiting harassment of people because of their sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation have been tested in the Employment Appeal Tribunal in relation to a man who is not homosexual.

The employee, who was heterosexual, received banter of a sexual nature and sexual innuendo from his colleagues to the effect that he was gay. While he was not gay (and his colleagues knew this) the joke arose because he had attended a boarding school and lived in Brighton.

He brought a claim for harassment on the grounds of sexual orientation because of perceived sexual orientation. Regulations are clear that someone can suffer harassment under this heading if they are perceived to be gay even if they are not.

However, the Tribunal reluctantly held that someone who was not perceived to be gay and who simply suffered comments insinuating he was gay, was not protected by the Legislation.

Therefore, heterosexual individuals who are known to be heterosexual but are ridiculed with homosexual banter are not protected by the Legislation.

The Tribunal said that the law was unacceptable and has allowed permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal on the matter. It is likely that the Tribunal felt that it was unacceptable because the ‘banter’ was allowed to continue (or what was described as banter), based on homosexual stereotypes.

The fact that the only person not protected by this Legislation was a heterosexual male appears to have not been the issue.