‘John-Paul Swoboda examines liability for omissions in the police negligence case of Tindall v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police [2024] UKSC 33.’
12 King’s Bench Walk, 6th November 2024
Source: www.12kbw.co.uk
‘On 23 October 2024, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Tindall v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police [2024] UKSC 33. The decision is the latest in many higher court decisions regarding the liability of police authorities to the public where they suffer injury.’
Ropewalk Personal Injury Blog, 11th November 2024
Source: ropewalk.co.uk
‘Tindall and another (Appellants) v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police (Respondent) [2024] UKSC 33, on appeal from [2022] EWCA Civ 25. The Supreme Court has affirmed that there is no duty of care, and hence no liability in negligence, for failing to confer a benefit, which includes failing to protect a person from injury, as opposed to making matters worse. This applies equally to public authorities such as the police as it does to private individuals.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 11th November 2024
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘A case-study in witness credibility: Deakin-Stephenson v Behar & Anor [2024] EWHC 2338 (KB).’
Quarterly Medical Law Review , 28th October 2024
Source: 1corqmlr.com
‘In the second session of our Autumn/Winter Employment Series, Nick Bidnell-Edwards and Safia Tharoo provide a concise review of whistleblowing law for detriment and dismissal claims, including recent developments, followed by practical tips on how to bring and to defend the claims.’
Local Government Lawyer, 1st November 2024
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Lawyers representing 37 women in a potential civil claim against Harrods over allegations involving former boss Mohamed Al Fayed have insisted that any non-disclosure agreements signed would “not preclude us from getting justice for these women.”’
Law Society's Gazette, 20th September 2024
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The Crown Prosecution Service has said that it twice considered bringing charges against ex-Harrods owner Mohammed Al Fayed but concluded there was no realistic prospect of a conviction.’
BBC News, 22nd September 2024
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Section 2 of the Compensation Act 2006 (Apologies, offers of treatment or other redress) was enacted to make it easier for organisations to apologise for their actions without admitting civil liability: it reads, “An apology, an offer of treatment or other redress, shall not of itself amount to an admission of negligence or breach of statutory duty”.’
Law & Religion UK, 10th April 2024
Source: lawandreligionuk.com
‘The Supreme Court has refused a claimant permission to appeal over the Court of Appeal’s dismissal of her claim that a school was vicariously liable for sexual abuse by an individual who had undertaken a work experience placement.’
Local Government Lawyer, 18th January 2024
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘In JXH v The Vicar, Parochial Church Council and Churchwardens of the Parish Church of Holcombe Rogus [2023] EWHC 3221 (KB), JXH claimed damages for injury and harm caused by two sexual assaults committed in the period 1979-1981 by Vickery House. The claim was brought against the parish, House having been the incumbent at the time the assaults took place. The parties were agreed that the sexual assaults had taken place, that JXH had suffered damage, including mental harm, and that the appropriate damages award would be £12,000. At the time the assaults took place, BXB was living in a “quasi-monastic” community in a cottage in the parish with two other two young men, supervised by House.’
Law & Religion UK, 3rd January 2024
Source: lawandreligionuk.com
‘Vicarious liability has been a hot topic for more than five years. Every time you look away there seems to have been a new judgment. The Supreme Court has had three goes (WM Morrison Supermarkets PLC v Various Claimants[1], Barclays Bank PLC v Various Claimants and Trustees of the Barry Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses v BXB) at installing some kind of flood defences to keep the tide of vicarious liability within boundaries and each time the tide retreats a little. MXX v A Secondary School is an example of the tide retreating a little since BXB. It is a reminder that the most difficult hurdle for claimants to overcome in the two stage test of vicarious liability for non-employees is the second part of the test – the close connection.’
Gatehouse Chambers, 20th October 2023
Source: gatehouselaw.co.uk
‘Can a school be vicariously liable for abuse perpetrated against a pupil by an adult on work experience? The Court of Appeal addressed this question in the above case and, unusually, overturned some of the findings of fact of the trial judge.’
Law Society's Gazette, 1st November 2023
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘In the ever-increasing cases concerning grooming/abuse, the Court of Appeal’s decision provides helpful guidance in the context of work experience employment and vicarious liability.’
3PB, 5th September 2023
Source: www.3pb.co.uk
‘In one of the first major decisions on vicarious liability since Barclays Bank and Morrisons, the Supreme Court has provided clarity on the limits of the doctrine.’
Guildhall Chambers, 17th July 2023
Source: www.guildhallchambers.co.uk
‘Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council is not vicariously liable for sexual abuse inflicted on claimant DJ by an uncle who was a de facto foster parent, the High Court has found.’
Local Government Lawyer, 27th July 2023
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘The recent case of Trustees of the Barry Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses v BXB confirmed the boundaries set by the Supreme Court, providing further clarity on the circumstances where an employer may be held vicariously liable.’
Mills & Reeve, 24th July 2023
Source: www.mills-reeve.com
‘The claimant was a member of the defendant’s church. She and her husband had formed a close friendship with an elder in the church. During a visit to the elder’s house in 1990, the elder raped the claimant while they were together in a room. She reported the crime to the police in 2014 and her assailant was convicted and imprisoned. She then brought a claim against the defendant alleging that it was vicariously liable for the elder’s attack on her. At first instance, the trial judge held that the defendant was vicariously liable and that decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal. The defendant then appealed to the Supreme Court.’
Law Society's Gazette, 12th May 2023
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘”Deeper pockets” is not sufficient justification for extending vicarious liability “beyond its principled boundaries” the Supreme Court has found, as it ruled a congregation cannot be liable for a rape committed by one of its elders.’
Law Society's Gazette, 2nd May 2023
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘In this appeal, the Supreme Court is asked to decide whether the Jehovah’s Witness organisation is vicariously liable for a rape committed by Mark Sewell, a former elder.’
UKSC Blog, 26th April 2023
Source: ukscblog.com
‘Mr and Mrs B began attending the religious services of the Barry Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses in 1984. They made lots of friends in the congregation, among whom were Mark Sewell, his wife Mary and their children. Mark Sewell was an elder; however, he began drinking heavily and behaving inappropriately towards female members of the congregation, for example by kissing them on the lips when he greeted them. In 1990, he raped Mrs B after they had been out evangelising together and in 2014 he was convicted of her rape and of indecently assaulting two other people.’
Law & Religion UK, 26th April 2023
Source: lawandreligionuk.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024