A recent ruling by the Court of Appeal has reversed a previous ruling in the case of Bellman v. Northampton Recruitment and found the defendant, a recruitment agency, to be vicariously liable for the violent actions of its managing director. At a late-night drinking session in a hotel, paid for by the agency and following a Christmas party where alcohol had also been served, the MD, Mr Major, became angry with one of his employees, Mr Bellman, for questioning his decisions. He punched him, with the result that Mr Bellman suffered a fractured skull and traumatic brain damage.
A judge ruled initially that Northampton Recruitment was not vicariously liable for Mr Major’s actions, but the Court of Appeal based its decision on the nature of his job and questioned the extent of the connection, as the agency’s most senior employee, between that job and his wrongful conduct. It felt that the initial ruling had failed to take sufficient account of the level of power and authority over subordinates entrusted to Mr Major by the agency, the fact that the incident was triggered by an apparent challenge to that authority and the contributing role played by alcohol supplied by Northampton Recruitment.
On the latter point it was found to be of central importance that the incident took place at a follow-on event to the Christmas party, but one where the agency was paying for taxis and drinks. Mr Major was not, therefore, in an environment in which he was operating outside his corporate role, and clearly he had felt professionally challenged and needed to reassert his official authority.
This ruling makes clear the importance of understanding that just because an event is not ‘official’ it does not automatically become a gathering of independent individuals. If the business is picking up the tab for drinks and taxis then the precise where and when of an event will be largely irrelevant and, by default, there will be a liability for what takes place.
Have a question? Contact Alison via email for more information.