header-logo header-logo

Third party pieces: the development of the doctrine of vicarious liability

09 June 2017 / Michael Salter , Chris Bryden
Issue: 7749 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Chris Bryden & Michael Salter examine a case which re-stated a number of important principles concerning the doctrine of vicarious liability

  • The development of the doctrine of vicarious liability is policy-based and has developed not as an organic strand of the common law, but as a pragmatic method of ensuring that in appropriate cases, deserved compensation is made available.
  • Claims involving vicarious liability will turn on their facts, and the close connection test must be examined against all of the relevant circumstances.

As the authors have written here before, employers should be aware of the risks of claims arising out of the behaviour of employees towards each other or third parties at workplace parties, even when those parties take place outside of the office and after working hours (see ‘Third party harassment’, 157 NLJ 7280, p 960). The risk of vicarious liability in tort, including under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 or claims of constructive unfair dismissal or discrimination have

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

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Partner appointed as head of residential conveyancing for England

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

Specialist firm enhances corporate healthcare practice with partner appointment

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