Keywords: Sex Discrimination Ordinance, SDO, new law

On 12 December 2014 the Sex Discrimination Ordinance ("SDO") was amended to make unlawful the sexual harassment of a person by a customer in the course of seeking to be provided with or being provided with goods, facilities or services by that person.

Effect of the amendment

The new law will protect women and men working in Hong Kong's goods and services sector. It provides a person with direct recourse against a customer who sexually harasses him/her in the course of providing goods, facilities or services to that customer.

In practical terms, the amendment has a particular impact on customer-facing employees whose role requires personal interaction with customers. For example, the following types of conduct would be caught by the amendment:

  1. A customer making crude jokes or sexual comments to an employee of a service provider.
  2. A customer inappropriately touching an employee of a service provider.

A customer who is an individual will be personally liable to the victim. In addition, if the person committing the unlawful harassment is an employee of a corporate customer and the act was done in the course of the employee's employment, then the corporate customer will also be vicariously liable (whether or not the act was done with the employer's knowledge or approval).

Further, anything done by a person as agent for another person with the authority of that other person (whether express or implied, and whether precedent or subsequent) will be treated for the purposes of the SDO as done by that other person as well as by him. So, for example, a manager of the employee who unlawfully harasses may also be liable if the act was done with his/her authority.

There is a defence to the above forms of vicarious liability if the corporate employer or manager can prove that they took such steps as were reasonably practicable to prevent the employee or agent from doing the unlawful act, or from doing in the course of his employment acts of that description.

What should you do?

We recommend that employers update their anti-harassment policy to deal with the amendments.

Appropriate anti-harassment training (and refreshers) should be provided to employees particularly customer facing employees. Among other things employees should be asked to alert management to any incidents of potential harassment immediately so that they may be addressed without delay.

Learn more about our Hong Kong office and Employment & Benefits practice.

Visit us at

Mayer Brown is a global legal services organization comprising legal practices that are separate entities (the Mayer Brown Practices). The Mayer Brown Practices are: Mayer Brown LLP, a limited liability partnership established in the United States; Mayer Brown International LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated in England and Wales; Mayer Brown JSM, a Hong Kong partnership, and its associated entities in Asia; and Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with which Mayer Brown is associated. "Mayer Brown" and the Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of the Mayer Brown Practices in their respective jurisdictions.

© Copyright 2014. The Mayer Brown Practices. All rights reserved.

This article provides information and comments on legal issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not a comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters discussed herein. Please also read the JSM legal publications Disclaimer.