Vijay Ganapathy & Catriona Ratcliffe discuss recent developments in vicarious liability, proving breach of duty in historical industrial disease cases, & limitation in fatal claims
- A local council was found not vicariously liable for sexual abuse reported by a child placed in care.
- The court ruled on whether a defendant should be held in breach in a historic asbestos exposure case involving low levels of asbestos exposure.
- The court decided whether to exercise its discretion in a case where limitation had apparently expired before death.
Of the cases tried in recent months, three stand out as they relate to areas where the law is changing. One of these concerns vicarious liability which is an area that has seen a series of groundbreaking rulings being handed down over the last few years.
In such cases defendants are not strictly at fault themselves but, in the circumstances, it is considered ‘fair, just and reasonable’ to hold them accountable, for example, where an employer is found liable for an employee’s wrongful
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=1da8eda2_1)
