HIGH COURT DECISION AS TO SCOPE OF VICARIOUS LIABILITY By Abigail Cohen 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.

The claim 1.

The claim was brought by 126 claimants in respect of alleged sexual assaults perpetrated by Dr Bates who carried out medical assessments of prospective Bank employees between 1968 and 1984.

Many of the claimants were

teenagers at the date of the relevant examinations. Dr Bates died in 2009 and it was no longer open to the Claimants to pursue his Estate for damages.

The issue 2.

The issue for the Court to determine was whether the Bank was vicariously liable in respect of the alleged sexual assaults?

3.

The Claimants’ case was that the Bank was liable as it utilised the services of Dr Bates in order to satisfy itself as to the medical fitness of a prospective employee; that the Bank dictated the content and nature of the examination; that the examinations furthered the Bank’s purposes i.e. of employing staff to enable it to be profitable; that Dr Bates was integrated into the Bank’s business

© 2017, Abigail Cohen

High Court decision re Vicarious Liability Abigail Cohen

as he carried out examinations on all prospective employees in the region over the relevant period and that the Claimants had no choice other than to undergo an examination with Dr Bates if they wished to secure employment. 4.

The Defendant Bank’s case was that Dr Bates was a self-employed independent contractor liable for his own acts.

He conducted examinations in his own

home as part of his practice, which involved seeing other patients, and he controlled his own work.

Vicarious liability; the two stage test 5.

Having conducted a review of the authorities on vicarious liability and how the jurisprudence has developed and evolved, the Court agreed that whether or not vicarious liability exists in a particular case involves a two stage test: 1) Is the relevant relationship one of employment or “akin to employment” 2) If so, was the tort sufficiently closely connected with that employment or quasi employment?

6.

When considering the first stage the five policy criteria identified by Lord Phillips in Catholic Child Welfare Society [2012] UKSC 56 and Cox v Ministry of Justice [2016] UKSC 10 are relevant:

(i) The employer is more likely to have the means to compensate the victim than the employee and can be expected to have insured against that liability; (ii) The tort will have been committed as a result of activity being taken by the employee on behalf of the employer;

(iii) The employee's activity is likely to be part of the business activity of the employer;

© 2017, Abigail Cohen

Page | 2

High Court decision re Vicarious Liability Abigail Cohen

(iv) The employer, by employing the employee to carry on the activity will have created the risk of the tort committed by the employee;

(v) The employee will, to a greater or lesser degree, have been under the control of the employer. 7.

Factors (i) and (v) above are not, the Court confirmed, as significant as factors (ii), (iii) and (iv).

Applying the test; Was the Bank vicariously liable? 8.

As to Stage 1, the Court considered these five factors.

As to (i) it was plain

that the Claimants’ only recourse was against the Bank – the Dr’s Estate having already been distributed – and that the Bank had the means to meet the claims. 9.

As to factor (ii) the Court considered it important that applicants to the Bank had to see Dr Bates in order to satisfy the Bank of medical fitness and secure employment.

There was no choice as to which Dr to see and the Bank made

the arrangements for the examination. headed with the Bank’s logo.

Dr Banks completed a medical report

Taking all these matters into account the Court

determined that the examinations performed by Dr Bates were performed on behalf of the Bank and for its benefit. 10.

As to factor (iii) the Court concluded that the medical assessment enabled the Bank to satisfy itself that an employee was physically suitable for the role and that without its workforce the Bank could not function. not for the benefit of the employee.

The assessment was

Dr Bates, the Court said, was acting for

the benefit of the Bank and in doing so was an integral part of the business activity of the Bank. 11.

As to factor (iv) the Court considered that the Bank did create the risk of the tort being committed. The Bank directed the Claimants – many of whom were

© 2017, Abigail Cohen

Page | 3

High Court decision re Vicarious Liability Abigail Cohen

young girls at the time – to attend Dr Bates’ home for an examination in a room alone and the examination included, for example, a chest measurement. 12.

As to factor (v), control, the Court accepted that Dr Bates organised his own professional life and carried out other medical activities not for the Bank.

But,

it said, this did not negate a control argument neither did the fact that examinations were performed in his own home.

The Court said that what

had to be looked at is the control which existed as between the Bank and Dr Bates in respect of the medical assessments, examinations and reports. 13.

In that regard it was relevant that the Bank was directing Dr Bates as to the questions to be asked and the physical examinations to be carried out for the purposes of completing the template form.

Control also manifested itself in

that applicants had no choice as to which Dr to see.

The control test was

therefore made out. 14.

Accordingly, the Court did not hesitate in finding that all of the criteria at Stage 1 of the test were met.

15.

As to Stage 2 and the question of ‘close connection’ the Court held that: “The claimants were in physical proximity to Dr Bates by reason of the nature of the examination. He was a doctor and, at the time of these offences, is likely to have been viewed by young women as being in authority not least because he was the doctor chosen by their present or prospective employer to carry out a medical examination relating to their employment. The sexual abuse took place when the doctor was engaged in the duties at the time and place required by the Bank. On the facts I find that the alleged sexual abuse was inextricably interwoven with the carrying out by the doctor of his duties pursuant to his engagement by the Bank.”

16.

Stage 2 was therefore also held to be satisfied.

17.

Finally, applying the check of whether it is fair, just and reasonable to impose liability, the Court accepted that it was balancing between two innocent parties. It noted again that the Claimants recourse was now only against the Bank.

© 2017, Abigail Cohen

The

Page | 4

High Court decision re Vicarious Liability Abigail Cohen

Court stated that the fair and just test did not therefore cause it to alter its conclusions on vicarious liability.

Comment 18.

This decision follows that of the Supreme Court in Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets plc [2016] UKSC 11 in which vicarious liability was imposed on the defendant supermarket for a physical assault committed by an employee on a customer.

It is a further example of the potentially widening set of

circumstances in which vicarious liability might arise. 19.

A traditional employment relationship is certainly no longer required for the imposition of liability and, as here, where tasks are outsourced to other entities or individuals the degree of control exercised over those tasks, and the extent of integration into a defendant’s business, may prove crucial in the determination of this issue.

20.

Clients will want, and need, to be aware of the direction the law is taking and to scrutinise carefully its arrangements with those to whom it outsources tasks, such as medical assessments for insurance purposes, and to have in mind this potential limb of liability when making its own insurance arrangements.

Abigail Cohen 10 August 2017

© 2017, Abigail Cohen

Page | 5

High Court Decision as to Scope of Vicarious Liability - Henderson ...

Aug 10, 2017 - 2017, Abigail Cohen. Page | 2 as he carried out examinations on all ... (iii) The employee's activity is likely to be part of the business activity of ...

155KB Sizes 13 Downloads 230 Views

Recommend Documents

Data Breaches, Vicarious Liability of Employers ... - Six Pump Court
demonstrate to their insurers satisfaction that they have undertaken extensive compliance with the existing data laws, the new GDPR and have ensured they have undertaken thorough cyber security procedures, then they run the risk that their insurers w

Commercial Court Shrinks Scope to Challenge Arbitrations - Hailsham ...
Oct 12, 2017 - Sonotrach v Statoil [2014] 2 Lloyds Red 252 (Flaux J), Brockton Capital v Atlantic-Pacific [2014] EWHC 1459. (Field J), New Age v Range ...

Commercial Court Shrinks Scope to Challenge Arbitrations - Hailsham ...
Oct 12, 2017 - In UMS & Ors v Great Station & Ors [2017] EWHC 2398 (Comm), the loser before the arbitration tribunal (made up of two retired Commercial Court Judges and a well-known lawyer/diplomat) contended that the tribunal had gone so wrong with

in the high court of m - High Court of Madhya Pradesh
commission of Rs.71,000/-, @2% payable to M/s Goyal. Builders were credited to the profit and loss account. 4. A raid was conducted by Income Tax Department,. Bhopal u/s 132 of the Income tax Act, 1961 (in short. 'the Act') in the premises of Goyal B

$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision ...
Nov 15, 2016 - the adverse finding, which resulted in penalty, which was not justified. 4. The Revenue urges that the impugned order is contrary to the. Explanation 1 to Section 271(1) (c) of the Act. It is stated that since the assessee was aware al

high court of kerala.pdf
Sign in. Page. 1. /. 2. Loading… Page 1 of 2. Page 1 of 2. Page 2 of 2. Page 2 of 2. Main menu. Displaying high court of kerala.pdf. Page 1 of 2.

High court judge.pdf
our SPEEDLOC. “3_kmh”, you. art of the scre. gByNettoDat. ow will pop ou. WORK director. CK MIN/MAX. u should see. eenshot abov. a”: ut. ry. X are. ve. Whoops! There was a problem loading this page. Retrying... Whoops! There was a problem loadi

High court judge.pdf
Loading… Whoops! There was a problem loading more pages. Retrying... Whoops! There was a problem previewing this document. Retrying... Download. Connect more apps... Try one of the apps below to open or edit this item. High court judge.pdf. High co

Vicarious experience and disorders of social cognition.pdf
The anatomy of empathy - Vicarious experience and disorders of social cognition.pdf. The anatomy of empathy - Vicarious experience and disorders of social ...

Orders of appointment of Additional Judges of Madras High Court ...
Orders of appointment of Additional Judges of Madras High Court (28.11.2017).pdf. Orders of appointment of Additional Judges of Madras High Court (28.11.2017).pdf. Open. Extract. Open with. Sign In. Main menu. Displaying Orders of appointment of Addi

Substances considered as not falling within the scope of Regulation ...
Jan 18, 2018 - CVMP publication entitled Position Paper on the definition of substances capable of pharmacological action in the context of Directive 2001/82/EC, as amended, with a particular reference to excipients. 1 Regulation (EC) No. 470/2009 of

Notification for Appointment of ACJ (High Court of Kerala) .pdf ...
Jaisalmer House, 26, Man Singh Road,. NEW DELHI-110 011, dated 02nd November, 2017. NOTIFICATION. In exercise of the powers conferred by article 223 ...

Vicarious Liability.pdf
Loading… Whoops! There was a problem loading more pages. Retrying... Whoops! There was a problem previewing this document. Retrying... Download. Connect more apps... Try one of the apps below to open or edit this item. Main menu. Whoops! There was

Notification for Appointment of ACJ (High Court of Kerala) .pdf ...
http://lgh3292.javaeye.com. 第 2 / 89 页. Page 2 of 2. Notification for Appointment of ACJ (High Court of Kerala) .pdf. Notification for Appointment of ACJ (High Court of Kerala) .pdf. Open. Extract. Open with. Sign In. Main menu. Displaying Notifi

Notification for Appointment of ACJ (High Court of Kerala) .pdf ...
Page 1 of 3. (TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE OF INDIA, PART 1 SECTION 2). No.K-l1019/01l2017-US.I. Government of India. Ministry of Law and Justice.

Creative coalition on Supreme Court Decision - Writers Guild of Canada
Feb 9, 2012 - Canadian culture, must be technology neutral and apply as media evolves to all those ... our televisions, movie screens and digital platforms.

Creative coalition on Supreme Court Decision - Writers Guild of Canada
February 9, 2012, Toronto – The Canadian creative community today expressed its disappointment with ... contribute to the Canadian broadcasting system. -30-.

9918 Date: 17.07.2015 - Orissa High Court
Jul 17, 2015 - Condition of Service of Senior System Officer, System Officer and System ... completed 30 months of continuous service in the corresponding ...

High Court Viva Notice.pdf
Sd./-. (Enayet Fazlur Rashid). Secretary. Bangladesh Bar Council. Page 1 of 1. High Court Viva Notice.pdf. High Court Viva Notice.pdf. Open. Extract. Open with.

Himachal High Court Judge Resigned.pdf
Page 1 of 2. (TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE OF INDIA, PART 1 SECTION 2). No.K.13020/01l2017-US.II. Government of India. Ministry of Law and Justice.

Employment Notification No - Calcutta High Court
Feb 11, 2013 - applications fees (mentioned below) by I.P.O. (which must be purchased on a date after publication of advertisement) need be drawn.

Andhra High Court -- VAT.pdf
Paradise Food Court Private Limited, agreeing and undertaking to transfer its ... respondent withdrew the levy of VAT on service tax collections. ... remained the same from 01.04.2000, when the word closure was included in the definition of ...