The claimant, a bisexual prison officer, suffered a campaign of direct discrimination and harassment on the basis of his sexuality or perceived sexuality throughout his period of employment.

The claimant was a prison officer at HMP Woodhill. He was summarily dismissed from his post on grounds of misconduct. He initiated proceedings alleging he had been victimised owing to his sexual orientation. He suffered detriment for having made a number of protected disclosures, was victimised for having done protected acts and was unfairly dismissed.

During the course of his employment he was subjected to comments about his hair and his appearance and was regularly called derogatory names, such as, ‘poof’, ‘gay’ and ‘vermin’. He was slapped, pushed, and sprayed with water. His bag was coloured in pink, a pink ‘fairy’ cake was smeared inside his bag, and fingernails were dug into his face by colleagues. Those involved described it as harmless "banter," yet the conduct was unwanted and clearly related to the claimant's sexuality which is a protected characteristic.

This treatment intensified after a meeting with his supervisor in which he disclosed his sexual orientation. The claimant was threatened by colleagues that if he made a complaint about the conduct of the other officers, they would submit false reports about him to ensure that he lost his job.

The claimant raised an internal grievance but this was not investigated. He subsequently made two written complaints, each of which was a protected act within the meaning of s.27 of the Equality Act 2010 (NB the EqAct 2010 does not apply in NI). A complaint was subsequently filed against him alleging that he had assaulted a prisoner and, following an investigation, he was dismissed. The judge described the investigation into the alleged misconduct as “no more than perfunctory” and held the claimant was clearly dismissed owing to the fact he had made a number of complaints.

The judge held the claimant was subjected to detriment for making numerous protected disclosures and was victimised having made protected acts.  He was unfairly dismissed and his dismissal was an act of victimisation. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5c5aca5f40f0b676d487cfe5/Mr_B_Plaistow_v_Secretary_of_State_for_Justice_-_3400502.2016_-_Judgment_with_Reasons.pdf