The Supreme Court has ruled in favour of a woman who was dismissed from her position after she reported sexual harassment, awarding her €37,700 in damages.
- The Supreme Court has ruled in favour of a woman who was dismissed from her position after she reported sexual harassment, awarding her €37,700 in damages.
This decision comes after the Electricity Authority of Cyprus scientific staff union fired her following her allegations against an executive member. The court upheld her appeal, overturning a previous ruling by the Labour Disputes Court that had dismissed her claim.
The case dates back to 2008 when the woman, who had been employed as a secretary since 2000, filed a written complaint on 19 June 2008, stating that she had been subjected to sexual harassment by a member of the executive committee for several years. The union initiated an investigation on 23 June, according to its code of practice for handling such complaints. The accused was informed he would not participate in the proceedings.
During this investigation, the woman requested to be accompanied by three individuals when giving her testimony, a request that was granted. However, minutes from the meeting indicated her behaviour was perceived as confrontational, leading to her being placed on paid leave.
After being given deadlines to provide evidence supporting her claims, the union concluded on 22 July 2008 that the complaint was “unfounded, unsubstantiated and false,” ultimately rejecting it. On 31 July, the woman was summoned for further discussions but did not attend, resulting in the union’s decision to terminate her employment immediately without notice.
The Labour Disputes Court initially ruled against her, stating that her dismissal was not related to her complaint but rather her behaviour during the investigation process. However, the Supreme Court found that the union had failed to conduct a fair and impartial investigation, particularly given that one of its own officials was implicated.
The court highlighted that the principle of impartiality was not upheld, and therefore, the summary dismissal was deemed unlawful. In its ruling, the Supreme Court did not delve into additional grounds for appeal, as the violation of the impartiality principle was sufficient to overturn the previous decision.
As a result of this ruling, the woman was awarded not only €37,700 but also legal interest from the date of the first decision, along with costs in her favour for both the initial ruling and the appeal. The court did not impose any costs on the respondent.
