‘WM Morrisons Supermarket plc have been held liable to 5,518 of their employees for a deliberate data breach by a rogue employee, Andrew Skelton.’
Technology Law Update, 19th December 2017
Source: www.technology-law-blog.co.uk
‘This recent judgment of the Court of Appeal resolved two important questions:
1. Where a line manager, who is not involved in the investigatory or disciplinary process, has tainted the evidence supplied to a person deciding whether an employee should be dismissed, and that decision-maker is innocent of any discriminatory motivation, whose knowledge or state of mind is to be attributed to the employer for the purpose of s.103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996)?
2. Can an employee recover damages for dismissal consequent on detriment in the whistleblowing context?
Old Square Chambers, 6th December 2017
Source: www.oldsquare.co.uk
‘Judgment in the trial on liability in a group litigation claim brought by 5,518 employees of the supermarket chain WM Morrison Supermarkets PLC has been handed down today [1 December].’
5RB, 1st December 2017
Source: www.5rb.com
‘In Vidal-Hall v Google [2015] EWCA Civ 311 the Court of Appeal held that damages claims under section 13 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) can be brought on the basis of distress alone, without monetary loss. Since that decision there has much speculation that a major data breach could lead to distress-based claims against the data controller by a large class of individuals. Even if each individual claim was modest (in the hundreds or low thousands of pounds) the aggregate liability could be substantial.’
Panopticon, 6th December 2017
Source: panopticonblog.com
‘The High Court (Langstaff J) has today handed down an almost 200 paragraph judgment in the first ever group litigation data breach case to come before the courts. The issue for the court was whether the defendant data controller, Morrisons, was in principle either directly or vicariously liable for the actions of a rogue employee who had, as an act of malice directed at his employer, taken payroll data relating to some 100,000 employees and published it online. The court concluded that, despite itself having been entirely innocent of the misuse, Morrisons was in principle liable to compensate all the claimants in the group, some 5,500 individuals, on the basis of the application of common law (no fault) vicarious liability principles.’
Panopticon, 1st December 2017
Source: panopticonblog.com
‘In determining whether to impose vicarious liability the court has to consider what sort of relationship has to exist between an individual and a defendant before the defendant can be made vicariously liable in tort for the conduct of that individual? (The first requirement) A classic example of a relationship which gives rise to vicarious liability is that of employer and employee.’
Park Square Barristers, 9th November 2017
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘A local authority has been held vicariously liable for the abuse of a woman by two sets of foster parents she was placed with as a child, despite not being negligent in its selection or supervision of the foster parents.’
OUT-LAW.com, 20th October 2017
Source: www.out-law.com
‘The law of vicarious liability is on the move” proclaimed Lord Phillips in the last judgment he delivered as President of the Supreme Court: Various Claimants v Catholic Child Welfare Society [2012] UKSC 56, (“the Christian Brothers case”). In a judgment recently handed down by the Supreme Court in the case of Armes (Appellant) v Nottinghamshire County Council (Respondent) [2017] UKSC 60, His Lordship has been proved correct.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 23rd October 2017
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘A woman who won a “landmark” legal battle against a council after being abused by foster parents as a child has urged more victims to speak out.’
BBC News, 19th October 2017
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘In Armes (Appellant) v Nottinghamshire County Council (Respondent) [2017] UKSC 60, the Supreme Court held Nottinghamshire County Council were vicariously liable for the physical, emotional and sexual abuse committed by foster parents to the appellant (Armes) during her time in foster care. The local authority can be held vicariously liable only in situations involving placements with foster carers. Zoe Fleetwood, solicitor and partner, and Hannah Duddridge, paralegal, from Dawson Cornwell, highlight that such vicarious liability does not extend to the local authority in situations involving child placements with family members.’
Family Law, 19th October 2017
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘Local authorities face a significant increase in claims after a majority of the Supreme Court ruled that councils can be held vicariously liable for wrongful actions of foster parents to a child in foster care.’
Local Government Lawyer, 18th October 2017
Source: localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘A woman who was abused as a child by her foster parents has won a Supreme Court battle against the local authority responsible for her care.’
BBC News, 18th October 2017
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘In Various Claimants v Barclays Bank PLC [2017] EWHC 1929 (QB), the High Court (The Hon Mrs Justice Davies DBE) held that Barclays Bank was vicariously liable in respect of alleged sexual assaults perpetrated by a Doctor, not employed by Barclays, who conducted medical assessments and examinations on prospective employees of the Bank.’
Henderson Chambers, 10th August 2017
Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk
‘Adam Ohringer considers the recent judgment of Various Claimants v Barclays Bank plc [2017] EWHC 1929 (QB) and its implications on vicarious liability.’
Cloisters, 10th August 2017
Source: www.cloisters.com
‘US-style ‘vicarious liability’ and new ‘failure to prevent’ offences are under consideration in long-awaited government proposals to reform the law on corporate criminal liability published today. Initial reaction from corporate crime specialists was divided, with some lawyers seeing the proposals as a climb-down while others described them as a new burden on business.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 13th January 2017
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘A review of the High Court decision in the case of Bellman v Northampton Recruitment Limited [2016] EWHC 3104 (QB) and a useful summary of the principles governing vicarious liability.’
Zenith PI Blog, 9th December 2016
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘Caroline Wood recently successfully represented the defendant local council in respect of a claim arising from an assault by a teaching assistant on a lunchtime supervisor, both of whom were employees at the same school.’
Park Square Barristers, 25th October 2016
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘An employer appealed a first instance decision in which it was held vicariously liable for the actions of employee.’
Zenith PI Blog, 26th October 2016
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
‘“The law of vicarious liability is on the move”, so began Lord Reed in his judgment in Cox -v- Ministry of Justice [2016] UKSC 10.’
Zenith PI, 23rd March 2016
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025