������Ƶ

View the related checklists about Vicarious liability

What transfers under TUPE, and who is liable—checklist

What transfers under TUPE, and who is liable—checklist This Checklist sets out the employment-related liabilities that arise on a relevant transfer under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE 2006), SI 2006/246, or TUPE transfer, and whether they transfer from the transferor to the transferee. For further guidance on relevant transfers, see Practice Notes: TUPE—business transfers and TUPE—service provision changes. In relation to a dismissal, the position may vary depending on whether the sole or principal reason for dismissal is an economic, technical or organisational reason (ETO reason) entailing changes in the workforce. For further guidance on ETO reasons, see Practice Note: TUPE—protection against dismissal—Dismissal for an ETO reason. Whether liabilities pass to transferee, or remain with transferor Under TUPE 2006, liabilities pass to the transferee or remain with the transferor, as follows: Action or event Circumstances Who is liable Details Dismissals Pre-transfer dismissal by transferor Reason for the dismissal is not the transfer Transferor Dismissal not automatically unfair (ordinary principles apply)TUPE 2006, SI 2006/246,...

View the related practice notes about Vicarious liability

Vicarious liability

What is vicarious liability?The general principle in criminal law is liability is personal not vicarious. This means that one person cannot be held liable for the crimes of another (other than where a person has aided, abetted, counselled or procured the act of another) (R v Huggins).See Practice Note: Encouraging and assisting criminality.There are exceptions to this general principle and, in some circumstances, liability can be transferred vicariously to another.Vicarious liability for public nuisance In R v Shorrock, the defendant was held to be vicariously liable for the common law offence of public nuisance having granted a licence over a field which was used for an event at which loud music was played which disturbed local residents. The defendant was not present at the event, but was found guilty of causing a public nuisance.In R v Stephens the defendant, an owner of a quarry, was convicted of nuisance when his workmen (contrary to his instructions and without his knowledge) disposed of rubbish into a river which obstructed the navigation. On...

Corporate criminal liability

This Practice Note deals with what is meant by corporate liability in relation to criminal law. It covers establishing corporate liability, the identification principle and the evidence required to establish corporate liability for prosecution.For an explanation of the factors which are taken into account before a company is prosecuted, procedure and how sentencing may be carried out following conviction, see Practice Note: How to prosecute a business.Corporate liabilityA company is defined for the purposes of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) to mean a company formed and registered under the Act (see Practice Note: Incorporating a company—What is a company?). A company may also be defined by reference to its predecessors or equivalent legislation from another jurisdiction. A company may be either incorporated (a body corporate) or unincorporated. There are other bodies corporate which are not commonly described as companies, such as partnerships.A corporate body, including a company, is a separate legal identity (sometimes called a non-natural person). As such, it can be tried, convicted and sentenced for committing a crime....

View the related precedents about Vicarious liability

Particulars of claim—vicarious liability and breach of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 and the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998

Particulars of claim—vicarious liability and breach of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 and the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998 [ In the COUNTY COURT AT [insert] OR In the High Court of Justice ] [ [Specify division] ] [ [Insert location] District Registry ] Claim No: Between [Insert name]        Claimant and [Insert name]        First Defendant Second Defendant ________________________________________________ Particulars of claim ________________________________________________ 1 At all relevant times, the Claimant was working as a [insert job title eg Delivery Driver] for [insert employer’s name eg Plant Hire Limited]. In the course of his work, on [insert date of accident], he was required to deliver a power float (‘the float’) to the First Defendant’s premises at [insert address]. 2 Upon the Claimant’s arrival at the premises, the First Defendant explained to the Claimant that he intended to unload the float from the truck using a JCB. The First Defendant explained to the Claimant that there would be various people on site who would...

View the related q&as about Vicarious liability

Can an employee bring claims for whistleblowing detriment and victimisation in the employment tribunal against a co-worker, without also bringing a claim against their employer?

Can an employee bring claims for whistleblowing detriment and victimisation in the employment tribunal against a co-worker, without also bringing a claim against their employer? Whistleblowing detriment A worker (W) has a right not to be subjected to any detriment by any act, or any deliberate failure to act, done by another worker of W’s employer in the course of that other worker’s employment on the ground that W has made a protected disclosure. Where this happens, the act or failure to act in question is treated as also done by the employer. This is so whether or not the act or omission occurred with the employer's knowledge or approval, though in the case of detriment by a fellow worker the employer is given a statutory defence if it can show that it took all reasonable steps to prevent that other worker from doing the thing in question or from doing anything of that description. The fellow worker or agent may be liable for the detriment as well...

Can an employer bring a negligence claim against an employee or worker for breach of duty?

Can an employer bring a negligence claim against an employee or worker for breach of duty? This Q&A has assumed that the worker has employee status, but the response also includes some information regarding duties owed by a worker or consultant. The employment status of the individual may be relevant when considering the scope of the duties that are owed to the employer. For information on employee and worker status generally, see Practice Notes: Employee status and Worker status. This response assumes that the worker has employee status but also includes some information regarding duties owed by a worker or consultant. Terms of the contract The contract of employment may be made up of all or any of the following: • express terms (which may be written or oral) • implied terms • imposed terms • incorporated terms For more information generally, see Practice Notes: Types of contractual term in employment and The term of trust and confidence. Duties of a worker...

View the related News about Vicarious liability

PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—29 May 2025

This week’s edition of PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights includes a High Court decision which considers accommodation costs and how the guidance set out in Swift v Carpenter should be applied in a case involving a short life expectancy. The Whiplash Injury (Amendment) Regulations 2025 come into force on 31 May 2025 and increase tariff amounts where a cause of action accrues on or after 31 May 2025. In addition, we have our usual round-up of other news, cases and New Law Journal articles of interest.

Share Incentives weekly highlights—8 May 2025

This week's edition of Share Incentives weekly highlights includes a focus on executive remuneration, as the 2025 AGM season continues.