header-logo header-logo

13 July 2018 / Chrisoulla Pawlowska
Issue: 7801 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Time to turn the tide?

nlj_7801_pawlowska

Chris Pawlowska reflects on recent case law & looks in vain for clarity on vicarious liability

  • Outstanding difficulties in the practical application of the Lister test.

The Court of Appeal in X v Kuoni Travel Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 938, [2018] All ER (D) 121 (Apr) concluded that there was no breach of EU law on the provision of package holidays, nor a contractual breach by Kuoni and a holiday-maker when an employee at one of their partner hotels in Sri Lanka attacked and raped a holiday-maker staying at that hotel. Though it did not formally constitute part of the claimant’s action, the first instance decision before McKenna J ([2016] EWHC 3090 (QB)) and the judgments in the Court of Appeal both raise the possibility of vicarious liability on the part of the hotel for the conduct of its employee. The range of views expressed by the different judges on the course of employment show that, while the Supreme Court in Mohamud v Morrison Supermarkets plc [2016] UKSC 11, [2016]

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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll