A Muslim trainee solicitor has won £110,000 in a sex harassment case after a male colleague told her to take off her headscarf so she could ‘attract men’.
Paralegal and divorcee Forida Kaiser was left ‘insulted and embarrassed’ after receiving the advice from lawyer Imitiaz Ahmed, an employment tribunal heard.
Ms Kaiser felt as if Mr Ahmed was suggesting she ‘would not be able to find a husband’ if she continued to wear her headscarf.
In a separate incident, fellow Muslim Mr Ahmed told Ms Kaiser ‘If you’re so into it – you should go elsewhere’ when he overheard her and one of the firm’s clients discussing ‘personal matters’.
Ms Kaiser told him she was ‘upset’ at his suggestion she was having an ‘intimate conversation’, but the conveyancer shouted at her, the tribunal heard.
Ms Kaiser successfully sued Khans Solicitors, based in Canary Wharf, London, at an employment tribunal. She has been awarded £109,020 in compensation.
The tribunal heard she started working for Khans Solicitors as a paralegal in April 2019.
She had been declared bankrupt after divorcing her husband, and was training to be a solicitor at the firm, the panel was told.
The practice covers areas of law including divorce, wills and immigration, and is a ‘predominantly Muslim business’, the East London employment tribunal heard.
In September of that year Mr Ahmed, a conveyancing specialist, saw a photo of Ms Kaiser without her headscarf on, and told her ‘that if she did not wear her headscarf, she could attract men’, the panel was told.
The tribunal said: ‘Ms Kaiser was insulted and embarrassed and thought that he was suggesting that she would not be able to find a husband if she kept her scarf on.
‘Mr Ahmed knew that her marriage had ended.’
In an incident the previous month, a client of another lawyer was talking to Ms Kaiser in the firm’s open-plan office.
She ‘politely indicated’ she wanted to get on with her work, but the client continued talking to her about ‘his personal matters’, the tribunal heard.
Angry at being disturbed from his work by the talking, Mr Ahmed stood up, pointed to the door and said to her ‘if you’re so into it – you should go elsewhere!’, the panel was told.
Ms Kaiser told him she was ‘upset’ at his suggestion she was having an ‘intimate conversation’, but the conveyancer shouted at her, the tribunal heard.
One of the firm’s partners, Muhammed Akram Rana, heard the disturbance and came out of his room before defending Ms Kaiser and shouting at Mr Ahmed, the panel was told.
The tribunal also heard Ms Kaiser suffered from a number of medical conditions including Glaucoma and Fibromyalgia.
She requested a larger computer screen and comfortable chair to ease her pain in the office, but none of her requests was met, the panel heard.
Colleagues would sometimes ‘comment on how much medication she needed’, and when she objected to moving some furniture, one colleague said ‘you will not die so you better not give me any excuses’, the tribunal heard.
Ms Kaiser’s claims of sex harassment and discrimination, disability discrimination, unfair dismissal, unauthorised deductions from wages, and breach of contract succeeded.
An additional claim of race discrimination failed.
Employment Judge Julia Jones concluded: ‘As a practising Muslim man, Mr Ahmed would have known that modesty in dress is important to Ms Kaiser as a Muslim woman and that he was likely to insult her by the suggestion that she needed to go against her beliefs in order to attract a man.
‘Ms Kaiser was being professional in speaking to a client and the suggestion that there was anything else going on hurt her feelings deeply.
‘She felt disrespected and insulted by the comments. It is our judgement that both comments were particularly offensive to her as a Muslim woman and that Mr Ahmed would have known that.
‘He would have been aware of how insulting, humiliating and offensive it would be to suggest that she should go off with a strange man.’
At the latest compensation hearing, Judge Jones found that Ms Kaiser has been caused significant ‘injury to feelings’.
‘In this case, the [company’s] treatment of [Ms Kaiser] caused her upset, frustration, worry, anxiety, mental distress, fear, grief, anguish, humiliation, unhappiness and exacerbated stress and depression’, Judge Jones said.