Lawyer unfairly dismissed over sexual harassment allegations

Senior lawyer accused of sexual assault wins unfair dismissal claim The employment tribunal heard the case after the judge ruled that CCTV footage showed he had misrepresented his female colleague’s behaviour.

Mr Rustambekov was working as a solicitor at the London firm Fieldfisher and was accused of sexually assaulting a colleague at an after-work party at London’s Savage Garden rooftop bar.

Rustambekov was fired by the firm on November 6, 2023 because it was found that in January 2023, he sexually harassed a woman, Colleague 1, by repeatedly inviting her to cancel an Uber and return to the office with him after a party organized by another employee. . And on July 20, 2023, he had behaved inappropriately at a work party by following Colleague 2 and Colleague 1 into the restroom and sexually harassing them.

But the central London court heard CCTV showed the encounter between the pair was “consensual”.

Labor judge Farin Anthony found flaws in Fieldfisher’s investigation report. In particular, witness statements did not support the conclusions of the investigation; A key witness did not say he witnessed Rustambekov inviting Colleague 1 and Colleague 2 to go to the toilet to have sex, as the investigation claimed.

Rustambekov, who worked in Fieldfisher’s dispute resolution department, was thought to frequently engage in “flirtatious banter”. A colleague said: “He is very humorous and enjoys presenting as a ‘lady man’. If (sic) there is a photo booth, (the plaintiff) would like to be in a photo with himself in the middle and the women on either side.”

Eyewitnesses said that at social events, their socially-minded female counterparts happily participated in games such as Snog, Marry, Avoid.

Colleague 1 claimed that in the July incident, Rustambekov “grabbed me, took me to the disabled cabin and locked the door.” I went to pick the lock and he pinned me against the wall. I tried to reach the lock, but he pushed me away from there. He kissed me and I didn’t want that to happen. He tried to put his hand under my skirt. I was trying to get away. I don’t know how long I was there but Jas (another colleague) noticed I was lost and I could hear her looking for me outside. “Jas knows I’m here, open the door,” I said. He did it. Jas saw that I was upset and we went home…”

An eyewitness testified that earlier in the evening, Colleague 2 left to go to the restroom and “I noticed the plaintiff following her and putting his arm around her. I followed them both, went to the bathroom and checked if they were okay. I said I noticed he (the plaintiff) had his arm around you; he said he did but “I told him to leave.”

The investigation reached its conclusion regarding these events on August 1.

Rustambekov returned from leave on 7 August 2023 and was informed that his employer had decided to initiate disciplinary proceedings against him regarding alleged “unwanted behavior of a sexual nature, including (before and before) inappropriate touching, kissing, persistent sexual advances and flirting”. 20 July 2023 inclusive) as well as intimidating and intrusive behavior (locking female colleague in accessible toilet).”

At the disciplinary hearing on 16 August, Rustambekov refused to comment on the allegations made against him and asked whether CCTV footage was requested. In particular, he refused to pin Colleague 1 to the wall, kiss her, and put his hand up her skirt. He said Colleague 1’s account was “complete fiction”.

CCTV evidence

On 10 September Hilton provided the defendant with a written description of the CCTV footage. Hilton’s representative stated: “According to CCTV, this (toilet incident) appears to have been consensual from both parties. Female A initiates the hug, Male A honors it. They hug for a while, then they start kissing, and while Male A is hugging, he slowly heads towards the disabled toilet. Female A does not resist, no force was applied.”

Describing the scene after the couple left the restroom, a Hilton representative said: “Woman A smiles, Woman B looks surprised, Man A smiles. They all spoke normally, there was no argument. None of them were disappointed or
distressed.”

On September 18, Mr. Rustambekov aired his complaint, saying that “the allegations presented to him are very serious and could not only result in the loss of his job, his license to practice law, his reputation, but also have detrimental effects on his family.” and health.”

Mr. Rustambekov was dismissed in November despite flaws in the evidence against him; and his appeal was rejected in February 2024.

However, in court the judge said Colleague 1’s version of events leading up to the accessible toilet incident was “deliberately false” and “completely unsupported by the description of the CCTV footage and completely unbelievable”.

The judge said: “The lie could only have been to protect his own interests and reputation, especially given that he witnessed (another colleague) leaving the accessible toilet with the plaintiff.”

Accordingly, Judge Anthony, whose defendant was Fieldfisher, “failed reasonably to treat the cause of the plaintiff’s dismissal as sufficient justification. I think there are alternatives to being laid off. “I think that the plaintiff’s unfair dismissal claim is based on solid foundations and is successful.”

Compensation will be determined later.

In a statement, Fieldfisher said: “We are disappointed with the employment tribunal’s decision. Although we disagree with the findings, we will take time to reflect on the decision and consider our next steps.

“We do not tolerate inappropriate behavior at Fieldfisher. We stand by our decision to take decisive action against it in this case and will continue to do so. However, in light of the decision, we have reviewed our internal disciplinary procedures to ensure that our response to instances of inappropriate behavior is thorough and robust.” We will review it.”

Professional review

Responding to the judge’s decision, Matt Dean, founder of work culture and behavior specialist Byrne Dean, said the case was unusual because “people tend not to make allegations out of the blue”.

Dean criticized Fieldfisher’s internal investigation: “The employer here has been criticized for some fundamental errors in its investigation and disciplinary process; all of which could have been avoided if the complainant, the suspect and all relevant witnesses had been properly and fully interviewed by someone they knew who could be independently trusted.”

“Investigating sexual misconduct is skilled and difficult work and should be treated as such.”

He added that the case was particularly interesting. New duty for employers to proactively prevent sexual harassment from happening. He said: “It’s landing in the workplace at a time when many of the men we speak to every day are expressing fear for their position and asking us how they can protect themselves in this new environment.”