Skip to main content

Insight article

January 10, 2019

Misbehaviour at the office Christmas party?

Litigation involving the antics of misbehaving employees at the office Christmas party have not only shown that sometimes fact is stranger than fiction, but that on occasion the long-awaited Christmas party can go badly wrong.

Whilst it would be hoped that most employees return to work following a Christmas break with nothing more remarkable than the post-Christmas blues, on occasion, employers can be dealing with the fallout from an office party disaster.

Employers can be held vicariously liable for discriminatory acts of employees – even if the event is held off-site and out of normal working hours.

The same can be said for liability for injury to a member of staff inflicted by another. Recently, in the case of Bellman v Northampton Recruitment Limited, the Court of Appeal ruled that a company was vicariously liable for the conduct of its Managing Director at a Christmas party following a physical attack on one of the employees by the MD, leaving the employee severely disabled.

In 2015, in an equally strange set of facts, a claimant brought an unfair dismissal claim in Westlake v ZSL London Zoo. At London Zoo’s Christmas party, zookeeper Ms Westlake got into a fight with a colleague over a love triangle involving another zookeeper. The exact details of the incident were disputed, but one of the individuals was hit in the face with a glass that Ms Westlake was holding. London Zoo decided to dismiss Westlake for fighting with a colleague, with the other member of staff involved given a final written warning. The tribunal stated that since the employer was unable to determine who started the fight, it was legitimate to dismiss both individuals or give both final written warnings – it was unfair to treat them differently. The unfair dismissal claim was upheld, but the tribunal decided to reduce the award to zero because of the conduct of the claimant.

A further example of the perils of the Christmas party is Bhara v Ikea Limited, in which, what is described as a tussle took place between two colleagues. Mr Bhara was dismissed, and it was found that the dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses and was, therefore, fair, even when the employees involved in the incident did not feel it was particularly serious.

These cases are ample demonstration of the perils of the office Christmas party and the potential risks it can pose for employers. If misconduct occurs at the Christmas party, employers should ensure that they conduct a reasonably thorough investigation before any disciplinary action. Furthermore, in advance of the Christmas party, at risk of being accused of being the “Fun Police”, employers should have a clear policy on what standard of behaviour is acceptable and ideally issue a statement to employees in advance of the party to remind all staff.

For further advice and information, contact Karen Cole today.

Note: This is not legal advice; it is intended to provide information of general interest about current legal issues.

Stay in touch

Subscribe to our newsletter

Stay in touch

By completing your details and submitting this form you confirm you are happy for us to send you marketing communications and that you agree to our Website Privacy Policy and Legal Notice and to us using Mailchimp to process your data.


Sending

News/Insight

  • The Employment Rights Act is a call to action for employers 
    A new year, a new employment framework: what employers need to know about the Employment Rights Act passed by parliament in December 2025.


    Read more
  • Dilapidations explained: What commercial tenants and landlords need to know
    Dilapidations are a common source of dispute at the end of a commercial lease. They can involve significant sums of money and often come as an unwelcome surprise to tenants who believed they had left a property in reasonable condition. Understanding


    Read more
  • The role of due diligence in corporate transactions
    In corporate transactions, due diligence is a key stage that usually follows agreement of Heads of Terms, allowing the Buyer to investigate the target company or its assets before committing to the deal.


    Read more
  • Love in later life and the inheritance tax trap
    Increasingly, lawyers are seeing couples who have chosen to live together rather than marry, sometimes for many years, without fully appreciating how differently the law treats them, particularly when it comes to inheritance tax and financial protect


    Read more
  • Understanding Heads of Terms in corporate transactions
    Heads of terms are a crucial first step in corporate transactions. Learn what they include, why they matter, and how they shape successful deals.


    Read more

What they say...

  • Amish Bristol, January 2026
    Absolutely brilliant, fast, professional, clear and delivered a robust service “Recent mortgage oversight from Ben Marks and Anne was superbly dealt with, and I intend on moving all my business to them. For a big firm, they really do pay attent

  • Client, January 2026
    Excellent experience “The process of my work was quick and effective.”

  • Vicky, January 2026
    Clear, friendly, helpful “Very efficient and helpful with arrangements for my will.”

  • R Cook, December 2025
    Settlement Sorted “Grayson Stuckey was great. Efficient and friendly with all aspects of the support provided. We worked well together and achieved a positive outcome. Recommended.”

  • Ivan Naisbitt, December 2025
    More than just a service “Michael Davies has been representing me for about 35 years, and I cannot recommend him or RIAA Barker Gillette (UK) highly enough. Aside from the normal conveyancing, he is always on hand to advise and guide you throug

Read more
Send this to a friend