Michele Robinson v Michael Harris & Ors

Michele Robinson v Michael Harris & Ors

The Tribunal correctly recognised the appellant’s complaints as brought through section 47 of the Equality Act, 2010 and applied the statutory definitions of discrimination, harassment, and victimisation to the facts. The Tribunal’s quotation of section 39 was superfluous and did not affect its analysis or conclusions. The appellant’s claims failed on the facts, not due to any error of law or misunderstanding of her employment status.

Parties
Appellant: Ms Michele Robinson; Respondent: Michael Harris; Respondent: Lee Williams; Respondent: Steve Clarke; Respondent: Lisa Weston; Respondent: 10 King's Bench Walk Chambers
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Discrimination, Harassment, Victimisation, Self Employed Barrister, Jurisdictional Gateway
Employment Law Equality Law Discrimination Harassment Victimisation Self Employed Barrister Jurisdictional Gateway

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ms Michele Robinson

Appellant

Michael Harris

Respondent

Lee Williams

Respondent

Steve Clarke

Respondent

Lisa Weston

Respondent

10 King's Bench Walk Chambers

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal misapplied section 47 of the Equality Act, 2010 by failing to recognise the appellant’s self-employed status
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal erred by quoting section 39 of the Equality Act, 2010, which applies only to employees
  3. 3 Whether the appellant was subjected to discrimination, harassment or victimisation contrary to sections 13, 26, and 27 of the Equality Act, 2010

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal correctly recognised the appellant’s complaints as brought through section 47 of the Equality Act, 2010 and applied the statutory definitions of discrimination, harassment, and victimisation to the facts. The Tribunal’s quotation of section 39 was superfluous and did not affect its analysis or conclusions. The appellant’s claims failed on the facts, not due to any error of law or misunderstanding of her employment status.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed