A senior female executive at an investment firm has won a sexual harassment claim after her ‘infatuated’ male married boss called her a ‘naughty girl’ and suggested buying a ‘love nest’ for them in Cyprus.

Marc Bandemer, 59, made repeated advances towards Louise Crabtree, 49, throughout the course of 2021 and 2022, when he sent her adoring messages, referring to her as his ‘second wife’, and the ‘Belle of the Ball’.

His ‘excessive attempt to engage in a romantic relationship’ included complimenting her ‘fashion model’ looks, as well as her ‘gorgeous feet’ and ‘candy toes’, an employment tribunal heard. 

The company chairman often referred to Ms Crabtree as ‘girl’, ‘honey’ and ‘naughty’ and suggestively messaged her to tell her he had left his bedroom door open while away on a work trip together. 

As the pair grew increasingly close, Mr Bandemer began referring to her and her three children as his his ‘adopted family’ – something that was strictly rejected after he kissed Ms Crabtree on the cheek in front of her daughter who ‘flipped out’.

The tribunal found Ms Bandemer was in a ‘subordinate’ position but ‘required’ an income as a single mother and didn’t want to ‘damage her employment prospects’. 

But now she is in line to receive compensation after the tribunal found she had been a victim of a ‘campaign of sexual harassment’. 

An employment judge ruled the use of the words ‘girl’ and ‘naughty’, in particular, were discriminatory as the boss would have never said them to a male member of staff.

The hearing in Southampton was told that Ms Crabtree joined Integer Wealth Global as executive director in April 2021.

Initially the relationship between her and Mr Bandemer was ‘friendly with banter’ but their ‘nuanced relationship’ began to involve ‘inappropriate’ comments.

These included him calling her ‘wife’, ‘naughty’, ‘girl’ and remarks made about ‘whips and chains’.

In May 2021, a Teams meeting transcript revealed him asking her ‘why did God make you so naughty?’, followed by an admission he was ‘way too arrogant’ to care what other colleagues would think about his remark.

The tribunal found Ms Bandemer was in a ‘subordinate’ position but ‘required’ an income as a single mother and didn’t want to ‘damage her employment prospects’.

Her failure to ‘strenuously object’ to comments she disliked did not necessarily mean that she ‘welcomed them or that they were wanted’, the panel said.

It was heard that the relationship between the two ‘went beyond’ the normal type of manager-worker relationship – as Ms Crabtree became ‘friendly’ with Mr Bandemer’s wife Lioni and would even get her nails done by her.

In July 2021, she messaged him to ask if another male colleague at work had ‘a thing for her’, to which he said yes because she was a ‘gorgeous woman…any guy would be fond of’. He also said anyone ‘dating, flirting or courting’ her had to have his ‘approval’.

Later that month, at her birthday party, Mr Bandemer pulled Ms Crabtree onto his lap – something which ‘everyone found uncomfortable’, the tribunal heard.

He told Ms Crabtree she had an ‘infectious personality’ that made her ‘quite easy to become addicted to’.

When planning a meeting between the two of them, Ms Crabtree suggested a Wednesday so they could celebrate his wife’s birthday, who could also do her nails.

Mr Bandemer, responding, said she had ‘really gorgeous feet’ and ‘candy toes’.

In August 2021, Ms Crabtree received a formal warning after a sending a ‘flippant’ email. This lead to her saying it was ‘very difficult’ to communicate with someone who is ‘one day her boss, another day her friend, then I am called very pretty underling’.

In September 2021, she sent another email to Mr Bandemer where she made it clear comments of a sexual nature were ‘no longer welcome’.

Giving evidence, Ms Crabtree said that up until the first warning their exchanges had been ‘quite friendly’, but that she told him she couldn’t continue as before because boundaries were getting ‘over-stepped’.

Nonetheless, in October 2021, he sent her a message saying she looked ‘absolutely gorgeous’ – something the panel said he did because he ‘wanted a relationship’ with her.

In an email trying to renegotiate and clarify her position at work, Ms Crabtree’s ‘firm email’ was treated as ‘unacceptable’ by Mr Bandemer.

The tribunal found her response, where she said it affected her ‘deeply’ for him to change from ‘friend to foe in seconds’, was an attempt to ‘tread a cautious line between not wanting to offend the him but not wanting to encourage him either’.

In December, Mr Bandemer commented on a picture Ms Crabtree posted on Instagram of a charity ball she had attended, saying she looked like the ‘Belle of the Ball…in that incredibly fetching red dress – very uber beautiful’.

Mr Bandemer then texted her, questioning why she was in this line of work, ‘when you could be a top ranking fashion model’, after her ‘unbelievably beautiful’ work pictures came through.

Later, he asked her about Christmas presents, writing: ‘Oh my word, Father Christmas just arrived with another present for you.’

He then offered to buy her children Christmas presents and gift them money, a gesture in which the panel heard his behaviour was ‘intensifying’ and she was ‘helpless to do anything’.

In January 2022, Ms Crabtree was left feeling ‘extremely uncomfortable’ upon learning she was going on a business trip with just Mr Bandemer – who had bought her flowers – and without his wife, as previously planned.

While on their trip to Luxembourg together, Mr Bandemer messaged her saying he would leave the door slightly ajar’, that she was his ‘person’ and called her ‘honey’ and ‘lovey’.

He then bought her a diamond solitaire ring, which she said she has never worn and kept in a cupboard.

After referring to Ms Crabtree and her children as his ‘adopted family’, he bought her a Valentine’s Day card in which he wrote ‘thank you for being in my life. And for what you have become to me. I love you’.

However, when he kissed Ms Crabtree on the cheek in front of her daughter who ‘flipped out’, she asked for ‘clear boundaries’ to be put in place in their relationship.

He admitted he would no longer ‘grab you like I do’ in front of people and be ‘very vigilant’ in front of her children.

Despite this, when a vase of Ms Crabtree’s broke, Mr Bandemer bought her another one with flowers, accompanied with a message reading ‘the flowers here in will never surpass your beauty’.

In February, 2022, he told her he loved her and that he needed a break from his wife.

By March, Mr Bandemer – who the tribunal found was a ‘somewhat forceful individual who expects to get his own way’ – was looking to buy ‘a love nest’ house for the two of them in Cyprus.

In May 2022, Mr Bademer became ‘much more hostile’ towards her as she was frozen out of the company’s plans move to Luxembourg and effectively demoted to sales director.

Ms Crabtree said a ‘campaign of sexual harassment’ had eventually resulted in her demotion and then dismissal on grounds of redundancy ‘as punishment’ for rejecting his advances.

Upholding her claims of sex discrimination and harassment, employment judge James Dawson said: ‘We are satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that the behaviour of [Mr Bandemer] was inextricably linked to the fact that [Ms Crabtree] was a woman.

‘Not only because the behaviour reflects the fact he was a heterosexual man who was romantically attracted to her but also because of the gender specific language used on a large number of occasions such as ‘girl’, ‘honey’ ‘wife’ and ‘naughty’.

‘We have included the word naughty because, in its context, we do not think that [Mr Bandemer] would have written in a similar way to a man.

‘We also think, on the balance of probabilities, that the respondent would not have described a man as beautiful and, for instance, sent him a vase saying that the flowers in the vase would never surpass his beauty.’

A future hearing will take place to decide her compensation.