|
|
Abduction - 15 April 2012 Read More |
|
|
DIY Probate Runs Risk - 9 April 2012 Read More |
|
|
Moving abroad with your child - 9 April 2012 Read More |
Stafford Office:
Tel. +44 (0)1785 211411
Click here to email us
Rugeley Office:
Tel. +44 (0)1889 583871
Click here to email us
|
|
|
EMPLOYER LIABLE FOR THEFT BY EMPLOYEE The Court of Appeal has decided that a carrier, Brinks Global Services, was liable for the theft by its employee of 15 bars of silver out of a consignment of 627 which it was contracted to transport to India. The employee had been instructed to fumigate the container in which the bars were being transported. The employee pretended to do this and locked the container. Subsequently he returned and stole the 15 bars. Brinks argued that the theft was not “in the course of his employment” because the employee had returned to commit the theft. The Court rejected this argument, however, saying that the risk of the theft was “reasonably incidental to the purpose for which the employee had been employed”. A similar principle has been applied in a number of cases in recent years. In 2003 a doorman employed by a nightclub left his post and went to his flat returning with a knife to stab a potential customer to whom he had refused entry which had resulted in a fracas. The victim of the stabbing asked the Court to hold the employer liable which it did. The Court held that the doorman’s actions had sufficient connection with his employment because the stabbing was linked with the fracas which had started at the club. It rejected the suggestion that the doorman having gone to his flat to obtain a weapon broke the connection with his employment. This form of liability for an employer is known as vicarious liability. Article by N R Pepper Consultant For advice upon employment law contact Nigel Pepper, Consultant and Patrick Nelson, Associate on 01785 211411. 17 November 2010 Disclaimer The contents of this article are for the purposes of general awareness only. They do not purport to constitute legal or professional advice. The law may have changed since this article was published.Readers should not act on the basis of the information included and should take appropriate professional advice upon their own particular circumstances |
|
|