A former marketing manager has been awarded close to £1 million in damages after the High Court ruled that his employer failed to deal appropriately with repeated warnings about excessive stress.
Matthew Foxton-Duffy secured £990,000 in compensation after the court found that Jockey Club Racecourses had breached its duty of care, leading to a psychiatric injury.
During the pandemic, Foxton-Duffy’s responsibilities expanded significantly. A restructure meant that the racecourses he previously supported in the south west, including Cheltenham, were merged with those in the north west, such as Aintree and Carlisle. The court heard that he repeatedly raised concerns about the increased pressure and the toll it was taking on his wellbeing.
Before the changes, he had managed the demands of the role effectively. Former regional head of racing Simon Claisse described the previous workload as one where “in terms of the scale of the job, it doesn’t really get much more high-pressured.” He added: “My observations of the claimant in that environment was that he handled the stress and the pressure of the role really well and he did a good job.”
Following the restructure, staffing in the western region dropped from 21 to seven, with a new national marketing team intended to take on centralised tasks. In practice, however, substantial workstreams, digital, creative, events, ticketing and access control, remained with regional teams, and further projects were added to Foxton-Duffy’s remit.
Despite warnings from staff, the judge found that the organisation failed to take adequate steps to investigate or reduce the risk of overwork.
Deputy High Court Judge Elizabeth O’Neill concluded that psychiatric harm had become reasonably foreseeable, placing the employer under a duty to act. Reasonable measures could have included reviewing workload, carrying out a stress risk assessment or seeking occupational health input, but none were properly pursued.
The court noted that under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, employers must ensure, so far as reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare of employees, including mental health. Unlike Equality Act claims, breaches of health and safety law can result in criminal enforcement, unlimited fines and, in serious cases, liability for directors.
Evidence presented showed that by November 2021, the employer should have recognised that Foxton-Duffy was at risk of psychiatric harm, even though he had no prior history of stress-related absence. Colleagues had observed signs of strain, including tearfulness, loss of composure in meetings, emails raising welfare concerns and deteriorating interactions with others. He told his line manager that the pressure was affecting his health and that “it is only a matter of time before I fall out with everyone”.
The court found that these warning signs were sufficiently clear to require intervention.
Operations manager Rebecca Elvin, giving evidence for Foxton-Duffy, said: “I recalled probably from mid-2021 onwards, that the claimant became much more withdrawn. He had also started to get a bit hot under the collar about stuff too and would get a bit emotional and lose his clarity of thought, I could visibly see him getting himself wound into a tighter and tighter coil… until he became quite snappy and visibly stressed.”
The court held that Jockey Club Racecourses failed to take any of the steps expected of a reasonable employer. There was no stress risk assessment, no occupational health referral, no review of workload or resources, and no effort to ensure he took annual leave. He had more than 20 days of untaken holiday, and the volume of work was cited as the reason he felt unable to take time off.
These measures were described as “obvious”, straightforward to implement, and likely to have prevented the eventual breakdown in November 2021.
A severe incident that month, when Foxton-Duffy attempted to drive into a tree on his way to work, marked the onset of complex PTSD and a moderate depressive episode, according to expert evidence. The court found that the employer’s inaction had materially contributed to the injury, and because the harm was indivisible, it was liable for the full extent.
Jockey Club Racecourses argued that Foxton-Duffy had not sought help or used available support services. The court rejected this, noting that impaired judgement was itself a symptom of the developing psychiatric condition.
The judge referred to Sutherland v Hatton (2002), which established that employees cannot be criticised for “soldiering on”. She found that the employer “knew or ought to have known that C had been unsuccessfully struggling with harmful effects of stress for some time”.
Because Foxton-Duffy and colleagues had repeatedly raised concerns, there was no reduction in damages for contributory negligence.
His solicitor, David Miers of Setfords, said after the ruling: “This judgment provides clear guidance on how employers should respond when concerns are raised about workplace stress and the risk of psychiatric injury. The court recognised that Matthew was a dedicated and high-performing employee who made repeated attempts to highlight the pressures he was experiencing. The decision underlines the importance of taking timely and proportionate steps to support employees when warning signs emerge. We hope the judgment will help promote better practice around mental health awareness and early intervention in workplaces nationally.”
The award included £72,500 in general damages, £211,920 plus interest for past loss of earnings since April 2022, and £684,800 for future losses.
A spokesperson for the Jockey Club said: “While we were saddened to learn of the health issues Foxton-Duffy has encountered since leaving us in 2022, we are disappointed by this judgment. However, in the interests of all concerned, we will not appeal against the court’s decision in order to allow those affected and involved in the case to move on.”
This article is based on a piece written for Personnel Today
