What the April 2026 changes to UK employment law mean for workers facing sexual harassment — new whistleblowing protections, constructive dismissal rights, and how to research the authorities that apply to your situation.
On 6 April 2026, the most significant expansion of workplace sexual harassment protections in a generation came into force. The Employment Rights Act 2025 made reporting sexual harassment a protected whistleblowing disclosure for the first time. Combined with the preventative duty introduced in October 2024 and further changes arriving in October 2026, the legal landscape for workers facing harassment has shifted substantially — and is still shifting.
This guide explains what has changed, what the key legal authorities are, and how to research the case law that applies to your situation.
What Changed on 6 April 2026
Before April 2026, a worker who reported sexual harassment to their employer had no automatic whistleblowing protection. To qualify as a “protected disclosure” under the Employment Rights Act 1996, the report had to fit into one of the existing categories of wrongdoing — typically a danger to health and safety, or a criminal offence. That forced workers into an awkward legal framing just to access basic protection against retaliation.
The Employment Rights Act 2025 changed this by amending section 43B of the Employment Rights Act 1996. A disclosure of information relating to sexual harassment that “has occurred, is occurring or is likely to occur” now qualifies as a protected disclosure in its own right, provided the worker reasonably believes the disclosure is made in the public interest.
This matters because whistleblowing protection is among the strongest in employment law. A worker who is dismissed for making a protected disclosure has a claim for automatic unfair dismissal — there is no qualifying period of service, and compensation is uncapped. A worker who suffers any detriment short of dismissal (being sidelined, having shifts reduced, being excluded from meetings) can bring a claim under section 47B of the ERA 1996.
The Public Interest Requirement
Not every complaint about sexual harassment will automatically qualify as whistleblowing. The worker must still reasonably believe that the disclosure is made in the public interest. In practice, this is a relatively low threshold — a worker reporting harassment that may affect colleagues, clients, or the wider culture of an organisation will typically meet it. A purely private grievance about personal relationship difficulties might not.
The leading authority on the public interest test is Chesterton Global Ltd v Nurmohamed [2017] EWCA Civ 979, where the Court of Appeal held that a disclosure can be in the public interest even where the worker making it has a personal interest in the outcome, and even where the group of affected people is relatively small.
Constructive Dismissal: When Resignation Becomes a Legal Claim
Workers who leave their job because of sexual harassment often assume they have given up any legal claim by resigning. That is not necessarily the case. If the employer’s conduct — whether by perpetrating harassment or failing to deal with it — amounts to a fundamental breach of the employment contract, the worker may have a claim for constructive dismissal.
The test for constructive dismissal was established in Western Excavating (ECC) Ltd v Sharp [1978] ICR 221. The Court of Appeal held that an employee is entitled to treat themselves as constructively dismissed where the employer is guilty of conduct that is a significant breach going to the root of the contract, or which shows that the employer no longer intends to be bound by one or more of its essential terms.
The term most commonly relied on in harassment cases is the implied duty of mutual trust and confidence, confirmed by the House of Lords in Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA [1997] UKHL 23. This requires that neither employer nor employee, without reasonable and proper cause, conducts themselves in a manner calculated or likely to destroy or seriously damage the relationship of trust and confidence between them. Failing to investigate a harassment complaint, tolerating a hostile work environment, or retaliating against a worker who reports harassment will all potentially breach this implied term.
There are important practical requirements. The worker must resign in response to the breach and not for some unconnected reason. They must also not leave it too long after the breach — continuing to work without protest may be treated as affirming the contract. However, tribunals recognise that a “last straw” incident can revive the right to resign even after earlier breaches were apparently tolerated, following the Court of Appeal’s analysis in Omilaju v Waltham Forest London Borough Council [2004] EWCA Civ 1493.
The Equality Act 2010: Harassment Claims
Section 26 of the Equality Act 2010 defines three types of harassment relevant to sexual harassment claims. The first covers unwanted conduct “related to sex” which has the purpose or effect of violating the worker’s dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. The second specifically targets unwanted conduct “of a sexual nature” meeting the same threshold. The third protects workers who are treated less favourably because they submitted to, or rejected, sexual harassment.
Unlike unfair dismissal, Equality Act claims have no minimum service requirement. A worker who has been employed for two weeks, two days, or two hours can bring a harassment claim. The time limit for bringing a claim is three months less one day from the date of the act complained of, though tribunals can extend this where it is just and equitable to do so.
The Employer’s Preventative Duty
Since 26 October 2024, the Worker Protection (Amendment of Equality Act 2010) Act 2023 has required employers to take “reasonable steps” to prevent sexual harassment of their workers. This is a proactive obligation — it requires employers to anticipate risks and take action before harassment occurs, not simply react after the fact.
Where a tribunal upholds a sexual harassment claim and finds that the employer failed to comply with this preventative duty, it may increase compensation by up to 25%.
From October 2026, the standard will be raised further. Under the Employment Rights Act 2025, employers will be required to take “all reasonable steps” to prevent sexual harassment — a higher bar than the current “reasonable steps” threshold. The same change will make employers explicitly liable for sexual harassment of their employees by third parties, such as customers, clients, or members of the public.
Researching the Authorities
Employment law research in this area requires searching across multiple sources. Tribunal judgments, EAT decisions, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court authorities, and the underlying statutory framework all interact. The key search terms include:
For whistleblowing claims: “protected disclosure sexual harassment”, “section 43B Employment Rights Act”, “automatic unfair dismissal whistleblowing”, “detriment protected disclosure”, “Chesterton v Nurmohamed” (the leading case on the public interest test).
For constructive dismissal: “constructive dismissal harassment”, “mutual trust and confidence”, “Western Excavating v Sharp”, “Malik v BCCI”, “last straw doctrine”, “Omilaju v Waltham Forest LBC”.
For Equality Act claims: “section 26 Equality Act harassment”, “unwanted conduct of a sexual nature”, “employer liability harassment”, “preventative duty sexual harassment”.
For quantum and remedies: “injury to feelings Vento bands”, “aggravated damages harassment”, “uplift preventative duty 25%”.
Search the Law searches 15 official UK legal databases simultaneously, including the Employment Appeal Tribunal, Court of Appeal, Supreme Court, and legislation.gov.uk. When you find a key authority like Western Excavating v Sharp, the citation network shows how subsequent decisions have applied, distinguished, or extended its principles — so you can quickly assess whether an authority still represents good law. The Deep Analysis feature can generate a structured research memo with verified citations for your specific factual scenario.
What Comes Next
The legal framework around workplace sexual harassment is still evolving. The October 2026 changes — raising the preventative duty to “all reasonable steps” and introducing third-party harassment liability — will create new obligations for employers and new grounds of claim for workers. The interaction between the new whistleblowing protections and existing Equality Act rights is also likely to generate significant case law over the coming months as tribunals begin to interpret the amended provisions.
Workers and practitioners researching this area should expect the case law to develop quickly. Checking how recent authorities have treated the key cases is essential — a research tool that maps citation relationships and flags when an authority has been distinguished or overruled is particularly valuable in a fast-moving area of law like this one.
Explore the employment law authorities on harassment and whistleblowing — with verified citations and treatment analysis.
Search the Law is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice. The information in this article is for legal research purposes only. If you need advice about sexual harassment at work, contact a solicitor, your local Citizens Advice, ACAS (0300 123 1100), or Rights of Women (020 7251 6577).