In the course of a heated discussion between the Claimant and her manager about pay, each accused the other of lying. To emphasise his contention in the context of this argument, the manager accused the Claimant of having lied about her pregnancy and miscarriage. Mrs Warby denied that she had lied, and claimed direct sex discrimination and harassment.

The Employment Tribunal found this created a hostile like environment such as to constitute harassment if it found that the accusation related to, or was on the grounds of, the Claimant's sex. It declined to do so. The Employment Appeal Tribunal considered whether the employment tribunal had been entitled to dismiss Mrs Warby's claims on the basis that her employer‟s comments had to be placed in context, or whether his comments were inherently discriminatory because a man cannot be pregnant.

The EAT held that context was of the greatest importance, and the ET had been entitled to regard the purpose of speaking the words to be related to proof of lying, and neither inherently nor otherwise spoken on the ground of sex. The EAT decision is useful for employers because it reaffirms that tribunals are obliged to take context into account when deciding whether or not particular conduct constitutes direct discrimination or harassment.