Sexual orientation: Thompsons’ tribunal victory for claimant underlines importance of training staff to observe rules

Solicitors should ensure their staff are fully informed of the law relating to discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation, as claims begin to gather pace, an employment lawyer warned this week.


National firm Thompsons recently won what is believed to be the third case to be brought under the Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2003 since they came into force in December 2003.


The tribunal found Durham City Council guilty of discriminating against Fausto Gismondi, who was group bookings co-ordinator at the Gala Theatre in Durham. The council was also found to have constructively and unfairly dismissed Mr Gismondi. The tribunal found that Mr Gismondi’s manager – who had subjected him to taunts of ‘gay boy’ – had discriminated against Mr Gismondi. The council declines to comment until the remedies hearing.


Jo White, the assistant solicitor at Thompsons in Newcastle who represented Mr Gismondi, said: ‘These claims are now gathering momentum as people become more aware of their rights. More people are now likely to start coming forward, as groups such as Stonewall [which campaigns for gay rights] are pushing the issue.


‘These rules apply to law firms just as much as any other organisation. Firms should make sure they provide staff with training on the sexual orientation regulations, not just the more obvious types of discrimination. They need to make sure that staff know about the regulations – unless they are a specialist employment lawyer, most people in the firm will probably not be aware of the legislation.’


She added: ‘This is an important decision because it highlights the responsibilities employers have under the sexual orientation regulations. Gay men and women have the same rights to be treated equally and with respect as anyone else at work.


‘There have been very few cases taken under the regulations so far, because as with all cases of discrimination it is very difficult to prove. I hope this decision will encourage others to come forward and utilise these regulations.’