The recent allegations concerning David Walliams have put workplace sexual harassment firmly back in the spotlight. This comes just as the legal framework relating to harassment undergoes a change of scene and stronger protections against workplace harassment take centre stage. While much of the wider reporting concerns allegations outside the workplace, there have been allegations concerning the author and TV personality’s interactions with female employees at his former publisher, HarperCollins, and former staff on Britain’s Got Talent, where he sat on the judging panel.

The allegations are particularly timely given that significant changes to the law on workplace harassment came into effect on 30 October 2026, strengthening the role employers are expected to play in preventing sexual harassment and introducing liability in circumstances where an employee is harassed in the course of their employment by a third party, such as a client, customer or, indeed, author or external “talent”.

In 2019, it was estimated that sales of Walliams’s books published by HarperCollins had reached £100m and that his books had been translated into 55 languages. However, according to reports, junior employees at the publisher were kept away from David Walliams, asked to interact with him in pairs and told not to visit his home. The publisher undertook an inquiry into alleged inappropriate behaviour towards young women in the workplace in 2024 and announced in 2025 that it would no longer publish new books by David Walliams. In September, it extended this to his existing catalogue. David Walliams was removed from Britain’s Got Talent after being recorded making derogatory and sexually explicit remarks about contestants during the recording of an episode.

The change to the law raises a potentially difficult question for employers, what happens when the person who presents the risk is not an employee? Does the law now require the employer to bring the important commercial relationships to an end if there is a risk that an employee may be sexually harassed?

What is workplace sexual harassment? 

Sexual harassment occurs when one person engages in unwanted conduct of a sexual nature and this conduct has the purpose or effect of either violating another’s dignity, or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. 

It is important to note that it is the environment created by the behaviour which is relevant (not the target of the behaviour), meaning that a person does not have to be the recipient of the offensive behaviour to be sufficiently affected by it that it amounts to the sexual harassment of that person. For example, an employee who overhears a client repeatedly making sexually explicit comments about a colleague, may find that this creates an offensive working environment for them, and raise a complaint, even though the comments were not directed at them. 

From “reasonable steps” to “all reasonable steps”

Since 26 October 2024, employers have been under a positive duty to take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment of their employees. At the time, this represented an important shift in emphasis; employers were no longer simply required to deal appropriately with sexual harassment after it occurred, but to proactively consider where risks existed within their organisation, and take reasonable measures to prevent it.

However, from 30 October 2026, section 20 of the Employment Rights Act 2025 (the “ERA 2025”) inserts the word “all” before “reasonable steps” imposing a materially higher and more exacting standard. Employers must now take all reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment. 

The consequences of falling short can be significant. An employee cannot bring a standalone Employment Tribunal claim solely on the basis that their employer has breached the preventative duty. However, where an employee succeeds in a sexual harassment claim, and the Tribunal also finds that the employer failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent it, the Tribunal can increase the compensation awarded by up to 25%. In addition, a failure to comply with the duty can expose an employer to investigation and enforcement action by the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

There has been much debate as to what would amount to ‘all reasonable steps”. Section 22 of the ERA 2025 created a new regulation-making power allowing the Secretary of State to specify the steps that are regarded as "reasonable", but those regulations are not expected until 2027/28, following consultation.

Where the harasser is not an employee

The other significant change, which came into force on 30 October 2026, concerns third parties. Section 21 of the ERA 2025 inserts new subsections into section 40 of the Equality Act 2010, making an employer liable where it "permits" a third party to harass an employee (which essentially means they failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent it, and it then happened).

This means that a restaurant for example, needs to consider customer behaviour, a healthcare provider needs to consider the conduct of patients towards its staff, and a publisher or media company dealing with high-profile authors or TV personalities will need to consider the circumstances in which its employees interact with high-profile or commercially important individuals, such as authors or TV personalities.

What should an employer do now?

For now, guidance on the steps employers should take comes from the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s non-statutory technical guidance and eight-step guide, supplemented by the indicative categories listed in section 40B of the Equality Act 2010. These steps include:

• conduct a risk assessment and regular staff surveys to identify the risk of harassment, with specific consideration given to harassment by third parties;
• take steps to address the risks highlighted by the risk assessment; 
• implement an anti-harassment policy which sets out what conduct is unacceptable, the employer’s zero-tolerance approach, how staff can report inappropriate conduct, the process that will be followed and the support available for victims;
• provide staff training with additional training for managers on handling complaints;
• engage with staff to understand where any potential issues lie and whether the steps being taken are working. It is important to remember that employees subjected to this behaviour do not always make formal complaints;
• handle complaints promptly via multiple routes. No one subjected to sexual harassment should have to report it to the wrongdoer;
• encourage the reporting of sexual harassment by having effective reporting mechanisms in place; and
• regularly review effectiveness and make changes.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission states that an employer is "unlikely to be able to comply with the preventative duty unless it carries out a risk assessment”. Inadequate training, or training that managers do not fully understand, will not discharge the duty, even where a policy exists.

Does the employer need to end the commercial relationship?

Can the employer take “all reasonable steps” to prevent harassment while keeping the commercial relationship? 

That might mean challenging the third party’s behaviour, setting clear boundaries, controlling meeting arrangements or using contractual rights to restrict contact or suspend the relationship. The more serious or repeated the conduct, the harder it may be to justify business as usual.

However, safeguards such as sending employees in pairs or moving someone else onto the account must not become a workaround for unacceptable behaviour. If staff need special arrangements to stay safe around one person, those safeguards may themselves be a warning sign.

If the risk cannot be adequately managed, suspension or termination must be considered and the reasons for the decision recorded, even if the employer decides to continue the relationship with safeguards in place. The purpose of those safeguards should always be to protect employees, not to preserve a relationship at their expense.

What now for the entertainment industry?

The Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority (“CIISA”) launched a confidential online reporting portal in October 2026 and has developed common standards for the creative industries covering safe working environments, prevention, reporting and organisational accountability. The Culture Secretary, Lisa Nandy, is expected to meet entertainment industry leaders to discuss safeguarding within the creative industries, with compulsory participation in CIISA reportedly on the table. At the same time, ministers are considering whether restrictions on non-disclosure agreements should go further. Taken together, these developments suggest that a broader question is being asked of the creative industries, not only how they deal with allegations once made, but whether their structures allow concerns about powerful and commercially valuable individuals to be raised safely in the first place. This is particularly important in an industry where freelancers and those on short-term contracts may be reluctant to complain through internal channels for fear of damaging future career opportunities.

Walliams has made it clear that he denies the allegations and stated that he, “has not broken the law”.