Woman’s ten-year sex battle goes on despite ‘staggering’ expense

Margaret Malcolm, 55, of Dundee, was a general assistant at the city’s Baldragon Academy until she resigned in 2002.

She took former employer, Dundee City Council, to a tribunal claiming to have been the victim of harassment by male technicians.

She claims she answered the phone at work one day only to find a model of a penis, modelled in Blu-Tack, stuck to the receiver. She squashed it, but was shocked on later answering the phone to find another model penis, this time with replica pubic hair.

She claimed three male colleagues taunted her and asked if she knew what it was and whether it was to scale. On the same day she claims she found male genitalia had been drawn on to paper cut-out dolls she had prepared for her Brownie troop.

The tribunal dismissed Ms Malcolm’s claim. It held the harassment had occurred, but declined to find the council liable.

This decision was, however, reversed because one of the members, who was unwell, had fallen asleep, and the case was considered by a new tribunal.

This hearing lasted 21 days over an 18-month period in 2005 and 2006, and the tribunal upheld her complaint and ruled the council liable.

But it also decided the case was time-barred, as a complaint had to have been made within three months of the last act of harassment.

The incidents in Ms Malcolm’s case had ended in December 2001, and she had not raised the case until April 2002.

Several further hearings were held before the employment tribunal and employment appeal tribunal (EAT), culminating in a judgment in 2009 which went against her and ended the case.

Next, Ms Malcolm, representing herself, took the dispute before three appeal judges in the Court of Session in Edinburgh.

Yesterday, the court ruled that her application for leave to appeal the EAT decision should be granted.

Lord Malcolm, sitting with Lady Paton and Lord Osborne, said: “The amount of time and expense incurred on this matter is already beyond belief.

“With the benefit of the terms of this opinion, the court hopes that those discussions will be resumed with the prospect of a more positive outcome, thus avoiding any need for further court or tribunal procedure.”

Lord Malcolm continued: “The amount of time, and associated expense, which has been spent on this matter is staggering.

“We note with concern that all of this has occurred in the context of a system which, was aimed at improving efficiency and reducing costs by encouraging lay representation.”

TIMELINE

2001: Margaret Malcolm alleges sexual harassment

April 2002: Takes employer, Dundee City Council, to tribunal

September 2002: The hearing begins

November: She resigns

April 2003: Tribunal dismisses her claim

MARCH 2004: Rehearing ordered after panel member fell asleep

2005-6: Rehearing finds for her, but case time-barred

January 2007: She appeals

June: Time-bar revoked

July 2007: Council challenges revocation

September: Tribunal upholds claim

July 2008: Council appeals

November: Claim dismissed

January 2009: Ms Malcolm appeals but loses. She takes case to Court of Session in Edinburgh

2012: Appeal judges grant Ms Malcolm leave to appeal