How the Strictly Come Dancing Bullying Investigation Reshaped Duty of Care
You will learn what the BBC investigation found about Giovanni Pernice and Amanda Abbington’s time on the show, how both sides describe the fall-out, and the wider changes to contestant welfare that followed.
A Partnership That Unravelled
Amanda Abbington and Giovanni Pernice were paired on Strictly Come Dancing in 2023. Abbington quit the show after five weeks, citing medical reasons. Months later she made formal complaints about Pernice’s behaviour during training, alleging bullying and harassment. Pernice denied the claims. The BBC launched an internal review that included former Metropolitan Police officers, who examined rehearsal footage and text messages.
What the BBC Found
The review assessed 16 separate allegations. It cleared Pernice on ten counts, including any suggestion of physical aggression. But it upheld six complaints. The BBC’s report concluded that Pernice’s language and tone toward Abbington was “belittling, dismissive and insulting” in a way that was disproportionate and unmerited. The broadcaster apologised to Abbington and thanked her for coming forward. BBC Studios later paid her a five-figure settlement and contributed to her legal costs. Pernice left the show and has not returned.
Two Very Different Accounts
In his memoir Taking The Lead, serialised in the Daily Mail, Pernice wrote that the controversy drove him to suicidal thoughts. He described hunching on a sofa scrolling through negative coverage and asking himself whether life was worth living. He said he developed stress-related heart damage, confirmed by an MRI, and gained 12 kilograms. He credited then-girlfriend Molly Brown with keeping him alive.
Pernice also claimed that Abbington set the tone of their working relationship. In his telling, their banter involved bad language, including calling each other the “C” word. He said a birthday text from her called him “k**b head”.
Abbington, in a statement to The Sun, called Pernice’s account a “gross mischaracterisation” of what happened. She said he took part in the BBC investigation that made findings against him, after which the channel paid her compensation. She noted she had been diagnosed with PTSD and had received rape and murder threats, and a bomb threat at her workplace, after coming forward. “I have no interest in engaging with that,” she said. “My focus is on moving forward.”
The Broader Reckoning on Duty of Care
The Abbington-Pernice case was not isolated. Other Strictly contestants also came forward with concerns. The BBC appointed an independent chaperone to be present in rehearsal rooms from 2024 onwards. Producers made changes to training schedules and increased welfare support for participants. The show’s production company, BBC Studios, issued new guidelines on acceptable behaviour during rehearsals.
None of those changes prevent a dispute like this one from erupting. But the investigation and the public fallout forced a broadcaster that prides itself on a “family show” image to confront the gap between its stated standards and what some contestants actually experienced. The case also showed how a single complaint can spiral into a long, damaging process for everyone involved.
Why It Matters
The Strictly row is not just a celebrity feud. It raises a practical question: how do broadcasters protect participants in high-pressure entertainment formats? The BBC’s response — independent supervisors, clearer codes of conduct, more robust complaint procedures — sets a precedent for other networks. The legal settlement and the memoir both serve as reminders that the cost of getting duty of care wrong can be measured in financial payouts, reputational damage, and personal trauma. The underlying tension — between competitive reality TV and genuine wellbeing — remains unresolved, but the procedures for handling it are now far more formalised than they were before 2023.