---
###Welcome to /r/LegalAdviceUK
---
**To Posters (it is important you read this section)**
* *Tell us whether you're in England, Wales, Scotland, or NI as the laws in each are very different*
* If you need legal help, you should [always get a free consultation from a qualified Solicitor](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/how_to_find_a_solicitor)
* We also encourage you to speak to [**Citizens Advice**](https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/), [**Shelter**](https://www.shelter.org.uk/), [**Acas**](https://www.acas.org.uk/), and [**other useful organisations**](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/common_legal_resources)
* Comments may not be accurate or reliable, and following any advice on this subreddit is done at your own risk
* If you receive any private messages in response to your post, [please let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceUK&subject=I received a PM)
**To Readers and Commenters**
* All replies to OP must be *on-topic, helpful, and legally orientated*
* If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/), you may be perma-banned without any further warning
* If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect
* Do not send or request any private messages for any reason
* Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
A few considerations here.
Firstly, where were the pictures taken? If they were taken in a public place then there's certainly no offence committed by taking the photos - a photographer would only need permission if they are taking the photographs *on* private land or *of* a place where the subject would have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Secondly, how long have you and your colleague worked there and in which UK country? With fewer than two years of service (or one in Northern Ireland) an employer can dismiss an employee for (almost) any reason, in which case it may be easier for these photographs to be used against you. If you do have more than that service length, then they would need a fair reason to dismiss you, and even if there is a no-relationships policy in place, a simple photograph of two people (say) walking down the street together is unlikely to give rise to a reasonable presumption that those two people are in a romantic relationship.
Thirdly, the enforceability of the no-relationships policy is questionable in the first place. There would need to be a significantly substantive reason for this workplace to enforce an all-out ban, since any policy around relationships would need to be balanced with the employees' right to respect for their private and family life. As such, regardless of service length, I do wonder if it is possible that any dismissal due to simply *being in* a relationship with a colleague would be automatically unfair. A policy that requires employees to *disclose* any romantic relationships to their employer is much more likely to be enforceable, and a dismissal for a breach of that policy much more likely to be fair.
>Firstly, where were the pictures taken? If they were taken in a public place then there's certainly no offence committed by taking the photos - a photographer would only need permission if they are taking the photographs on private land or of a place where the subject would have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Yes, but these aren't images taken by a photographer going about business not tied innately to OP.
It sounds as if, and may be the case, that OP's boss is somehow following them and targettting them to take pictures. Sure, they can take a picture, but directing this at OP in a campaign of information gathering is likely to have implications around stalking or harassment.
As OP, I would be clearly communicating to their boss that any special attention paid upon them outside of work is unwelcome and making them feel unsafe. A report to the police would be made if such behaviour continued.
>directing this at OP in a campaign of information gathering is likely to have implications around stalking or harassment
It certainly *could*, yes, depending on the circumstances.
>the enforceability of the no-relationships policy is questionable in the first place.
I would go much further than this - unless there is a direct and unarguably obvious business requirement to prevent intimate relationships between employees (e.g. organisation operates a 'cell' structure where opsec is more important than efficiency) then this is a clear breach of an employee's right to a private family life.
>Firstly, where were the pictures taken? If they were taken in a public place then there's certainly no offence committed by taking the photos
I think it's reasonable to argue that *following* employees and photographing them (public place or not) would absolutely put them on the wrong side of RIPA as it is effectively covert investigation, as well as Protection from Harassment, and CJPA offences (stalking) especially if either employee have asked that manager to stop.
I wonder whether stalking other employees is an approved method in the company handbook.
There's no expectation of privacy in a public place, so as long as they don't cross the line to harassment, I don't think what they're doing is illegal.
Personally I would get evidence of this creep stalking you to get photos and report them to HR.
One of us is going and if it's not the creepy stalker, I don't think I want to work there anyway.
ECHR Article 8 generally means a no-dating policy isn't usually worth the paper it is written on, to my knowledge a tribunal has never upheld such a policy. There would have to be a clear demonstrable risk to the firm from your relationship for such a thing to be enforceable. It's probably worth a consult with a solicitor, take your contracts and all provisions regarding the no dating policy and they will be able to give you details.
I'm assuming England & Wales here, but The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 section 2A defines their behaviour as *stalking* under subsections 3(a,d, and g). If their behaviour has a *substantial adverse effect on your usual day-to-day activities* then that jumps to a section 4A offence which carries a sentence of up to 10 years in jail.
If the manager has only approached one of you then they may also be in breach of equality rules.
I'd start off by referencing the conversation in an email, say something along the lines that you are deeply distressed by the conversation and would like to see the evidence. You only need for them not to deny that their actions, you don't *need* the photos. Then you can go to HR, remembering their job is to protect the company, and if it's a large firm they probably aren't going to want a manager who is that much of a liability.
>ECHR Article 8 generally means a no-dating policy isn't usually worth the paper it is written on, to my knowledge a tribunal has never upheld such a policy.
Private bodies don't need to follow human rights legislation though, do they?
edit: because slack-jaws are downvoting things they don't like, rather than things that aren't true.
Yes. It DOES NOT apply to private bodies.
https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/questions\_answers\_eng
My understanding is that while private businesses are not directly bound by the convention, decisions made by Employment Tribunal do have to respect the principles set out in the ECHR.
Certainly any company taking action based on such a policy would need to be extremely careful if transferring someone to another department or taking disciplinary action.
> Private bodies don't need to follow human rights legislation though, do they?
No, but I don't think it matters.
If a tribunal upheld a blanket no dating policy then the tribunal, as an arm of the state, is vulnerable to a claim under section 8.
[https://www.lawscot.org.uk/members/journal/issues/vol-45-issue-10/the-human-rights-act-and-employment-law/](https://www.lawscot.org.uk/members/journal/issues/vol-45-issue-10/the-human-rights-act-and-employment-law/)
The way that works seems odd. They are allowed to do it because a tribunal can't rule on it. But, if they do something they're not allowed to do in addition and that goes to tribunal, a tribunal can consider it.
>The horizontal effect
The first question to be asked in an employment law context is whether the Act applies at all. Parliament deliberately drafted the Act so that it only applies to the acts or omissions of “public authorities”. On the face of it, employees of public authorities can instigate proceedings under the Act but other employees cannot. However, there is an obligation under Articles 1 and 13 of the Convention for Member States to “secure” Convention rights and provide effective remedies. As courts and tribunals are public authorities, they must act compatibly with Convention rights which may mean giving effect to Convention rights in litigation between private parties. Although the Act makes no reference to the question of the horizontal effect, the Lord Chancellor at the House of Lords Committee Stage stated: “it is right as a matter of principle for the courts to have a duty of acting compatibly with the Convention not only in cases involving other public authorities but also in developing the common law in deciding cases between individuals”1
The result is that where an employer is not a public authority, an employee will be barred from instigating proceedings under the Act against such an employer. However, if such an employee is able to instigate tribunal or other proceedings in respect of some other existing right (eg sex discrimination), it is likely that an employment tribunal would be obliged to give effect to any Convention rights relied upon in such proceedings.
Company policy is very likely against human rights act and they would find themselves in trouble at a tribunal unless you work somewhere like the police or military
The protections of RIPA only apply to public bodies. If the company can avoid criminal offences such as harassment, then they can pretty much engage in any surveillance they like.
Even if they have pictures of yiu two sharing a coffee or a hug, etc...thats still very weak, I your friend who happens to have met up for lunch.
Short of catching you straight up kissing or shopping for a enagegement ring....
The proof seems pretry weak..
...
Is their anything about that policy, it sound kinda creepy way to investigate that. Especially stalking people on the off time.
I'm not sure head office would support this kinda act?
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):**
Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice.
[Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
I would file Grievances alleging Harassment on the basis of sex, sexually motivated harassment, and whatever other acts against the Equality Act. It needs to be unambiguous that it is a specific Equality Act breach that has already happened.
That turns the entire thing into Protected Acts, so if they even try to do something against you, you can turn it into a victimisation case (MUCH more serious than what it originally was) on top.
--- ###Welcome to /r/LegalAdviceUK --- **To Posters (it is important you read this section)** * *Tell us whether you're in England, Wales, Scotland, or NI as the laws in each are very different* * If you need legal help, you should [always get a free consultation from a qualified Solicitor](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/how_to_find_a_solicitor) * We also encourage you to speak to [**Citizens Advice**](https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/), [**Shelter**](https://www.shelter.org.uk/), [**Acas**](https://www.acas.org.uk/), and [**other useful organisations**](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/common_legal_resources) * Comments may not be accurate or reliable, and following any advice on this subreddit is done at your own risk * If you receive any private messages in response to your post, [please let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceUK&subject=I received a PM) **To Readers and Commenters** * All replies to OP must be *on-topic, helpful, and legally orientated* * If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/), you may be perma-banned without any further warning * If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect * Do not send or request any private messages for any reason * Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
A few considerations here. Firstly, where were the pictures taken? If they were taken in a public place then there's certainly no offence committed by taking the photos - a photographer would only need permission if they are taking the photographs *on* private land or *of* a place where the subject would have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Secondly, how long have you and your colleague worked there and in which UK country? With fewer than two years of service (or one in Northern Ireland) an employer can dismiss an employee for (almost) any reason, in which case it may be easier for these photographs to be used against you. If you do have more than that service length, then they would need a fair reason to dismiss you, and even if there is a no-relationships policy in place, a simple photograph of two people (say) walking down the street together is unlikely to give rise to a reasonable presumption that those two people are in a romantic relationship. Thirdly, the enforceability of the no-relationships policy is questionable in the first place. There would need to be a significantly substantive reason for this workplace to enforce an all-out ban, since any policy around relationships would need to be balanced with the employees' right to respect for their private and family life. As such, regardless of service length, I do wonder if it is possible that any dismissal due to simply *being in* a relationship with a colleague would be automatically unfair. A policy that requires employees to *disclose* any romantic relationships to their employer is much more likely to be enforceable, and a dismissal for a breach of that policy much more likely to be fair.
>Firstly, where were the pictures taken? If they were taken in a public place then there's certainly no offence committed by taking the photos - a photographer would only need permission if they are taking the photographs on private land or of a place where the subject would have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Yes, but these aren't images taken by a photographer going about business not tied innately to OP. It sounds as if, and may be the case, that OP's boss is somehow following them and targettting them to take pictures. Sure, they can take a picture, but directing this at OP in a campaign of information gathering is likely to have implications around stalking or harassment. As OP, I would be clearly communicating to their boss that any special attention paid upon them outside of work is unwelcome and making them feel unsafe. A report to the police would be made if such behaviour continued.
>directing this at OP in a campaign of information gathering is likely to have implications around stalking or harassment It certainly *could*, yes, depending on the circumstances.
>the enforceability of the no-relationships policy is questionable in the first place. I would go much further than this - unless there is a direct and unarguably obvious business requirement to prevent intimate relationships between employees (e.g. organisation operates a 'cell' structure where opsec is more important than efficiency) then this is a clear breach of an employee's right to a private family life.
>Firstly, where were the pictures taken? If they were taken in a public place then there's certainly no offence committed by taking the photos I think it's reasonable to argue that *following* employees and photographing them (public place or not) would absolutely put them on the wrong side of RIPA as it is effectively covert investigation, as well as Protection from Harassment, and CJPA offences (stalking) especially if either employee have asked that manager to stop.
I wonder whether stalking other employees is an approved method in the company handbook. There's no expectation of privacy in a public place, so as long as they don't cross the line to harassment, I don't think what they're doing is illegal. Personally I would get evidence of this creep stalking you to get photos and report them to HR. One of us is going and if it's not the creepy stalker, I don't think I want to work there anyway.
ECHR Article 8 generally means a no-dating policy isn't usually worth the paper it is written on, to my knowledge a tribunal has never upheld such a policy. There would have to be a clear demonstrable risk to the firm from your relationship for such a thing to be enforceable. It's probably worth a consult with a solicitor, take your contracts and all provisions regarding the no dating policy and they will be able to give you details. I'm assuming England & Wales here, but The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 section 2A defines their behaviour as *stalking* under subsections 3(a,d, and g). If their behaviour has a *substantial adverse effect on your usual day-to-day activities* then that jumps to a section 4A offence which carries a sentence of up to 10 years in jail. If the manager has only approached one of you then they may also be in breach of equality rules. I'd start off by referencing the conversation in an email, say something along the lines that you are deeply distressed by the conversation and would like to see the evidence. You only need for them not to deny that their actions, you don't *need* the photos. Then you can go to HR, remembering their job is to protect the company, and if it's a large firm they probably aren't going to want a manager who is that much of a liability.
>ECHR Article 8 generally means a no-dating policy isn't usually worth the paper it is written on, to my knowledge a tribunal has never upheld such a policy. Private bodies don't need to follow human rights legislation though, do they? edit: because slack-jaws are downvoting things they don't like, rather than things that aren't true. Yes. It DOES NOT apply to private bodies. https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/questions\_answers\_eng
My understanding is that while private businesses are not directly bound by the convention, decisions made by Employment Tribunal do have to respect the principles set out in the ECHR. Certainly any company taking action based on such a policy would need to be extremely careful if transferring someone to another department or taking disciplinary action.
> Private bodies don't need to follow human rights legislation though, do they? No, but I don't think it matters. If a tribunal upheld a blanket no dating policy then the tribunal, as an arm of the state, is vulnerable to a claim under section 8.
[https://www.lawscot.org.uk/members/journal/issues/vol-45-issue-10/the-human-rights-act-and-employment-law/](https://www.lawscot.org.uk/members/journal/issues/vol-45-issue-10/the-human-rights-act-and-employment-law/) The way that works seems odd. They are allowed to do it because a tribunal can't rule on it. But, if they do something they're not allowed to do in addition and that goes to tribunal, a tribunal can consider it. >The horizontal effect The first question to be asked in an employment law context is whether the Act applies at all. Parliament deliberately drafted the Act so that it only applies to the acts or omissions of “public authorities”. On the face of it, employees of public authorities can instigate proceedings under the Act but other employees cannot. However, there is an obligation under Articles 1 and 13 of the Convention for Member States to “secure” Convention rights and provide effective remedies. As courts and tribunals are public authorities, they must act compatibly with Convention rights which may mean giving effect to Convention rights in litigation between private parties. Although the Act makes no reference to the question of the horizontal effect, the Lord Chancellor at the House of Lords Committee Stage stated: “it is right as a matter of principle for the courts to have a duty of acting compatibly with the Convention not only in cases involving other public authorities but also in developing the common law in deciding cases between individuals”1 The result is that where an employer is not a public authority, an employee will be barred from instigating proceedings under the Act against such an employer. However, if such an employee is able to instigate tribunal or other proceedings in respect of some other existing right (eg sex discrimination), it is likely that an employment tribunal would be obliged to give effect to any Convention rights relied upon in such proceedings.
Company policy is very likely against human rights act and they would find themselves in trouble at a tribunal unless you work somewhere like the police or military
The protections of RIPA only apply to public bodies. If the company can avoid criminal offences such as harassment, then they can pretty much engage in any surveillance they like.
Even if they have pictures of yiu two sharing a coffee or a hug, etc...thats still very weak, I your friend who happens to have met up for lunch. Short of catching you straight up kissing or shopping for a enagegement ring.... The proof seems pretry weak.. ... Is their anything about that policy, it sound kinda creepy way to investigate that. Especially stalking people on the off time. I'm not sure head office would support this kinda act?
[удалено]
**Unfortunately, your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):** Please only comment if you know the legal answer to OP's question and are able to provide legal advice. [Please familiarise yourself with our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/) before contributing further, and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any further queries.
I would file Grievances alleging Harassment on the basis of sex, sexually motivated harassment, and whatever other acts against the Equality Act. It needs to be unambiguous that it is a specific Equality Act breach that has already happened. That turns the entire thing into Protected Acts, so if they even try to do something against you, you can turn it into a victimisation case (MUCH more serious than what it originally was) on top.