header-logo header-logo

Strictly liable?

Chris Bryden & Michael Salter provide an update on vicarious liability

Over the past two decades, a palpable shift in tortious liability to the party most able to pay has been detectable as an underlying theme in the common law. The clearest and most obvious example of this judicial thinking has been the growth in the scope of vicarious liability of employers for the torts of their employees. Such liability is strict; if the employee is liable then, so long as that employee can be connected to the employer, the employer will become jointly and severally liable. Given that the employer is likely to have deeper pockets than the employee, or be backed by a policy of insurance, this will usually afford a financial remedy to the wronged party.

Employee frolics

Employers were until relatively recently offered some protection from this strict liability for their employee’s wrongs. Judicial tests of being engaged in the business of the employer were developed by the common law; where an employee was engaged in

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll