Parental misconduct: using harassment law to stop abuse of teachers and staff

A recent harassment case successfully brought by a headteacher against the parents of two children at his school has demonstrated that the law can be effectively used to protect teachers (and indeed anyone else) who find themselves alarmed or distressed by unacceptable behaviour or abuse. Sadly, we know unacceptable conduct can occur in schools leaving staff stressed and, in some cases, on the brink of leaving their job. Occasionally, the conduct can reach the levels of harassment for the purposes of the law, as this article demonstrates.

Following disagreements with parents – including over a detention given for mobile phone use – Kevin Flanagan, head of a state secondary school in the Wirral, brought a harassment claim against the parents in relation to a campaign to remove him from his position.

According to his legal claim, the parents’ behaviour included starting a petition, setting up a hostile Facebook group, posting abusive content up to 100 times a day, verbal abuse at the school gates, accusing him of misogyny and bullying, shouting at the school receptionist and driving dangerously in pursuit of his partner. The parents denied harassment and said they were exercising their right to freedom of expression over concerns about their daughters.

When the behaviour did not stop, despite a series of letters to parents (including to the defendants), Mr Flanagan decided to stand up to it by engaging a lawyer and issuing a harassment claim at court seeking damages and an injunction (a court order against the parents to restrain their behaviour).

A settlement was reportedly reached in January, with the parents agreeing to pay him £10,000 in costs and damages, and to abide by a list of more than ten restrictions on their behaviour, including that they would not enter the school grounds, use the path near the school or approach Mr Flanagan or his family in any way.

With teachers increasingly being targeted with abuse – and with harassment in various forms generally on the rise across society – this article sets out some key guidance about when someone’s behaviour would amount to harassment in law, as opposed to just being annoying or upsetting. It also highlights the importance of seeking to deter such behaviour and of being aware of alternatives to litigation.

What is harassment?

The elements of the offence are set out in the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 (PHA) which says that a person must not pursue:

• a course of conduct;
• which amounts to harassment of another person;
• which he/she knows, or ought to know, amounts to harassment.

“Harassment” is not defined, except to say that harassing a person includes “alarming a person or causing the person distress”.

This means that if someone engages in behaviour which causes alarm or distress to another person, and they are aware or should reasonably be aware that their actions are harassing, they are committing an offence.

In other words, the offence is drawn very widely, enabling all sorts of different types of behaviour to qualify as harassment.

An unusual feature of harassment is that it can be a civil wrong or a criminal offence, depending on severity.

This means that a harasser can either be sued privately in the civil courts or reported to the police for potential prosecution in the criminal courts.

The remedies for a civil action are damages (for anxiety caused and any resulting financial loss) and/ or in appropriate cases, an anti-harassment injunction to prevent the behaviour in question.

If the behaviour is pursued via the criminal justice system, the police can, in appropriate cases, issue a restraining order against the harasser. If the case goes to court and succeeds, a judge can impose a fine and/or, in severe cases, a prison sentence.

However, it is important to note that in some scenarios, behaviour which may seem harassing can be permissible under the law.

Under the PHA the conduct in question will not count as harassment if the person carrying it out can demonstrate that “in the particular circumstances the pursuit of the course of conduct was reasonable”. This is because the law seeks to strike a balance between the right to freedom of expression (or to voice legitimate criticism or concerns) and the right not to be subjected to oppressive and distressing behaviour.

Element 1: A course of conduct

What is “conduct”?

“Conduct” is a very broad term, and almost any type of behaviour can amount to harassment.

The PHA specifies that ‘”conduct” includes “speech” which could cover anything from saying unpleasant things to someone, shouting abuse or criticism at them, sending written communications such as mounting a petition, sending letters, emails or texts, and posting hostile content on social media.

However, words do not need to be involved: a wide range of “silent” behaviours can constitute harassment, for example standing outside someone’s house or workplace, following them or sending unwanted gifts.

What is “a course of conduct”?

This means conduct occurring on two or more occasions. So, for example, if a parent shouted abuse at a teacher once, that would not be enough. But if they then sent a threatening letter, or stood waiting for them outside school, the requisite two occasions would be present.

Element 2: What does “amounts to harassment” mean?

As set out above, there is no definition of “harassment” within the legislation. However, the case law mandates that the following elements must be present:

• Targeting: the conduct must be “targeted” at the claimant. Hence if a person was oblivious to it or unlikely to find out about it, this would not ordinarily be harassment.
• Oppressive and unreasonable: the conduct must be oppressive and unreasonable, objectively judged. This may depend on the context; what might be acceptable on a building site may not be in other contexts.
• Seriousness: the course of conduct must be “grave”, ie not trivial or amount to behaviour which the target could reasonably be expected to tolerate as part of the normal cut and thrust of daily life.
• Sufficient gravity to warrant the intervention of the criminal law: an unusual and important feature of harassment law is that unless the conduct is sufficiently grave to warrant the intervention of the criminal law, it will not be possible to bring a civil claim (or, of course, a criminal one).
• An element of torment: there needs to be an element of “torment” of the victim “of an order which would sustain criminal liability” and the behaviour must “cross the boundary from the regrettable to the unacceptable”.

Therefore, when faced with distressing conduct, it is important to carefully assess whether it is likely to satisfy the above criteria when deciding whether to bring a harassment claim.

Element 3: Which the person pursuing it knows, or ought to know, amounts to harassment

This requirement will be met “if a reasonable person in possession of the same information would think the course of conduct amounted to harassment”. In other words, it does not matter if the person doing the conduct does not think they are committing harassment (or indeed if they think it is justified): the test is what the reasonable person would think.

Deterring harassing behaviour in schools: the Parent Contract

It is obviously important to try to prevent harassing conduct before it occurs. In addition, as of 26 October 2024, employers have a legal duty to take “reasonable steps” to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace. This includes steps to prevent sexual harassment by third parties – who are defined broadly and likely to include parents. What constitutes “reasonable steps” is case-specific. However, the Equality and Human Rights Commission has said that employers should make clear to third parties that sexual harassment is not permitted.

Schools in the independent sector should therefore ensure that an appropriately worded clause prohibiting harassment of staff is included in the Parent Contract (pointing, as appropriate, to any code of conduct in place with regards to parents).

The school’s Parent Contract and related policies should clearly set out that the school expects parents to behave in a reasonable and respectful manner towards staff, pupils and other parents and that any form of threatening or abusive behaviour, whether in person, in writing or via electronic communication, is unacceptable and will not be tolerated. It should also reserve the school’s right to take appropriate actions which may include restricting access to school premises, terminating the Parent contract (ie refusing to continue to educate the child) or involving external authorities if necessary.

The model Independent Schools’ Bursars Association (ISBA) Parent Contract on which we advise contains clauses which:

(a) set out the parents’ obligations, including the cooperation and assistance the school requires from them in order to maintain a constructive relationship;

(b) entitle the school to require the removal of a child if the parents’ conduct or behaviour is unreasonable, causes a breakdown of trust and/or confidence etc; and

(c) entitle the school to otherwise terminate the Parent Contract if the parents do not comply with their obligations under it.

We have also helped the ISBA to prepare a template Parent Code of Conduct which (among other things) sets out the school’s expectations from parents as a matter of policy and includes examples of unacceptable behaviour.

The relevant Government guidance (which applies to the state sector but is increasingly echoed in independent schools’ policies) is clear that a school complaints process should not be used as a battering ram. Schools are not obliged to deal with serial complaints, which can become harassing: once a complaint process has been completed, the school is entitled not to respond to a further complaint into the same issue or to say that the matter is closed.

Alternatives to litigation

 Due to the uncertainty inherent in any litigation and the cost and stress involved, it should usually be regarded as a last resort. Whether alternative action may be appropriate – and, if so, what that might be – will depend on the facts, but could include:

• Instructing solicitors to send a formal cease and desist letter to the parents setting out why the behaviour constitutes harassment, is unacceptable and formally asking that it stop. (Such a letter should precede any legal action in any event.)
• Putting in place practical measures to protect staff such as taking them off a particular duty if that is where they are being harassed and/or offering appropriate support.
• In very serious cases, it may be necessary to consider involving the police. Police involvement may itself cause the behaviour to stop, or result in a restraining order being issued and/or prosecution, removing the need for civil litigation.

This publication is a general summary of the law. It should not replace legal advice tailored to your specific circumstances.

© Farrer & Co LLP, May 2025