header-logo header-logo

12 August 2020 / Christopher Johnson , Frederick Powell
Issue: 7899 / Categories: Features , Employment , Vicarious liability
printer mail-detail

Vicarious liability: Striking a balance

25796
Post-Barclays Bank, Christopher Johnson & Frederick Powell provide an update on vicarious liability for practitioners & employers

In brief

  • Barclays Bank v Various Claimants: the principle authority on the relationship between the tortfeasor and the defendant—one of two dependent factors of whether vicarious liability will be imposed in a particular case.

Whether vicarious liability will be imposed in a particular case depends on two factors: (1) the relationship between the tortfeasor and the defendant; and (2) the connection between that relationship and the wrongdoing. The principle authority on the first factor is now the decision in Barclays Bank v Various Claimants [2020] UKSC 13, [2020] All ER (D) 04 (Apr) in which the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the High Court and the Court of Appeal, and held that Barclays was not vicariously liable for sexual assaults perpetrated by a self-employed doctor whom they had engaged to carry out medical examinations on prospective employees. That decision, and its implications, is considered below.

The position

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

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll