Author: Kiril Moskovchuk
Published: January 13, 2017
Reading time: 2 minutes
This article is 5 years old.
Read our disclaimer keyboard_arrow_down
This website content is intended as a general guide to law as it applies to the motor trade. Lawgistics has taken every effort to ensure that the contents are as accurate and up to date as at the date of first publication.
The laws and opinions expressed within this website may be varied as the law develops. As such we cannot accept liability for or the consequence of, any change of law, or official guidelines since publication or any misuse of the information provided.
The opinions in this website are based upon the experience of the authors and it must be recognised that only the courts and recognised tribunals can interpret the law with authority.
Examples given within the website are based on the experience of the authors and centre upon issues that commonly give rise to disputes. Each situation in practice will be different and may comprise several points commented upon.
If you have any doubt about the correct legal position you should seek further legal advice from Lawgistics or a suitably qualified solicitor. We cannot accept liability for your failure to take professional advice where it should reasonably be sought by a prudent person.
All characters are fictitious and should not be taken as referring to any person living or dead.
Use of this website shall be considered acceptance of the terms of the disclaimer presented above.
Is a company liable for injuries caused by the company director after a work Christmas party has ended? No, answered the High Court in Bellman v Northampton Recruitment.
Northampton Recruitment organised a Christmas party for its staff. After the party ended, the guests went on to a hotel and continued drinking. At around 3.00 am and argument erupted between one of the company directors and a manager. The assault caused serious brain injury to the manager.
The manager sued the company for personal injuries arguing that the company was vicariously responsible for the actions of its director. The court had to decide whether at the time the director inflicted the injuries he was acting in the scope of his employment. The court took the view that as the Christmas party organised by the company had clearly ended by the time of the assault, the blow was struck at a private drinking party and hence the company had no liability. The court went on to say that the decision would have been different had the assault taken place at the Christmas party itself.
This judgment provides a timely reminder to companies that they could be held responsible for improper behaviour at works events, especially where alcohol is provided in plenty.