Miss April Freke

Case Summary

The claimant was employed by the second respondent. She made a complaint of sexual harassment. The Tribunal found that eight incidents of sexual harassment had been established and concluded that the incidents formed a course of conduct by the first respondent. The respondents appealed, contending only that the Tribunal should not have accepted that one of the eight incidents had happened.

The tribunal found eight incidents of sexual harassment established against the claimant's employer, forming a course of conduct, and rejected the respondents' appeal which sought to challenge the finding of one of those incidents.

• •sex discrimination
• •sexual harassment
• •evidence
• •Tribunal accepting claimant's uncontradicted account of harassment

Judgment approved by the Court R Vikal & Emma Victoria Ltd t-a Shapins Clinic v A Freke © EAT 2026 Page 1 [2025] EAT 206 Neutral Citation Number: [2025] EAT 206 Case No: EA-2023-001494-OO EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL Rolls Building Fetter Lane, London, EC4A 1NL Date: 25 November 2025 Before : THE HON. LORD FAIRLEY, PRESIDENT - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Between : (1) ROHIT VIKAL (2) EMMA VICTORIA LIMITED (t/a SHAPINS CLINIC) Appellants - and - MISS APRIL FREKE Respondent - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr Rafael Katz (instructed by Peninsula) for the Appellants Miss April Freke the Respondent in person Hearing date: 25 November 2025 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT Judgment approved by the Court R Vikal & Emma Victoria Ltd t-a Shapins Clinic v A Freke © EAT 2026 Page 2 [2025] EAT 206 SUMMARY Sex discrimination; sexual harassment; evidence; Tribunal accepting claimant’s uncontradicted account of harassment The claimant was employed by the second respondent. She made a complaint of sexual harassment. Her complaint involved alleged conduct of the first respondent in his capacity as a director and owner of her employer, the second respondent. The Tribunal heard evidence and found that eight incidents of sexual harassment had been established. It concluded that the incidents formed a course of conduct by the first respondent. The respondents appealed, contending only that the Tribunal should not have accepted that one of the eight incidents had happened. They submitted that in light of Tui UK Limited v. Griffiths [2023] UKSC 48, the Tribunal had erred by impermissibly accepting the evidence of the claimant in relation to that one incident. It was also submitted that, in accepting the claimant as credible and reliable in relation to that single incident, the Tribunal had i…