Vicarious liability in the course of employment—the close connection test


Produced in partnership with Andrew Wilson
Practice notes

Vicarious liability in the course of employment—the close connection test


Produced in partnership with Andrew Wilson

Practice notes
imgtext

This Practice Notes considers the circumstances in which the court will hold an employer vicariously liable for a tort which has been committed by an employee. The courts’ approach to the ‘close connection’ test has evolved over time and this Practice Note provides practitioners with an understanding of how the doctrine has developed.

To identify the circumstances in which a court may find an employer to be vicariously liable for a tort committed by an employee it is useful to trace the development of the doctrine.

Salmond test

Historically, the test to be applied was the one described by Salmond in his 1907 text Law of Torts.

The fundamental proposition was that:

‘a master is not responsible for a wrongful act done by his servant unless it is done in the course of his employment’

Salmond went on to say that it was deemed to be done in the course of his employment if it was either:

  1. •

    a wrongful act authorised by the master, or

  2. •

    a wrongful and unauthorised

Andrew Wilson
Andrew Wilson

Consultant Solicitor

Andrew has more than 25 years’ experience of working in the fields of personal injury and occupational disease litigation, acting for both claimants and defendants. He trained at L Bingham & Co, gaining early experience in a number of important high profile claims involving the MIB. During the 1990s Andrew worked at Hextalls and then Kennedys, predominantly for defendants across a range of motor, employers’ liability and public liability matters many of which involved serious injuries or death. More recently, he has dealt with cases for claimants who have suffered serious injuries or occupational disease. He was a partner in a large specialist practice. He has provided seminars to solicitors and other legal professionals both for an external conference company and in house on the workings of the Civil Procedure Rules in the context of personal injury claims, amongst other subjects.

He has now set up his own legal consultancy, providing advice and support to solicitors, particularly a specialist London practice, in connection with fatal accidents and very serious injury cases such as brain injury, mostly in the High Court. He has continued to develop his education and training activities, providing seminars and contributing articles and commentaries to legal information services.

Since his training, Andrew has retained a particular interest in issues of motor indemnity and the operation of the Road Traffic Act and Article 75.

Read moreRead more
Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
Key definition:
Vicarious liability definition
What does Vicarious liability mean?

Criminal responsibility for the act or omission of another, usually an employee.

Read more

Popular documents

Contributory negligence in personal injury claims

Contributory negligence in personal injury claimsContributory negligence is a partial defence which can lead to a discount in damages.Other defences may also be relevant. See Practice Notes: Did the claimant consent to the risk of injury? and Was the claimant involved in an illegal activity?If a

If a claimant has issued proceedings against two defendants and subsequently the first defendant makes a

If a claimant has issued proceedings against two defendants and subsequently the first defendant makes a Part 36 offer to settle the matter despite liability being outstanding between the two defendants, can the first defendant then pursue the second defendant for a recovery? Will separate

Material contribution in personal injury claims

Material contribution in personal injury claimsThe standard test for determining whether the defendant’s breach caused the claimant’s loss is the ‘but for’ test. This test requires the court to consider: but for the breach of the duty by the defendant, would the claimant have sustained the damage?

Burden of proof in personal injury claims

Burden of proof in personal injury claimsBalance of probabilitiesThe claimant must prove that, on the balance of probabilities, the defendant has been negligent or has breached their statutory duties. Proof on the balance of probabilities means proof that it is more likely than not. If the