header-logo header-logo

Expanding the boundaries of vicarious liability

20 September 2018 / Vijay Ganapathy
Issue: 7809 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail
nlj_7809_ganapathy

Vijay Ganapathy rounds up some critical cases on vicarious liability, damages for fear, independent contractors & causation

  • Outlines important caselaw at the frontiers of vicarious liability regarding employees, independent contractors, damages for fear alone, causation and novus actus interveniens.

Recently the courts have had to grapple with a variety of issues. Starting with vicarious liability, the Court of Appeal ruling in Barclays Bank plc v Various Claimants [2018] EWCA Civ 1670 further confirms the extent to which this doctrine has now been extended. The relevant test for determining whether a defendant is vicariously liable requires consideration of the following.

  • Was the relationship between the wrongdoer and defendant ‘akin to employment’?
  • If it was, was the wrongdoer’s act ‘closely connected’ with this employment?

The last couple of decades have seen the courts significantly broadening the range of scenarios in which both the above limbs could be applied. Therefore, in JGE v Trustees of the Portsmouth Roman Catholic Diocesan [2012] EWCA Civ 938, the defendant was found liable for the abuse

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll