Employer liability for employee’s wrongdoings

In Weddall v Barchester Healthcare and Wallbank v Wallbank Fox Designs Ltd, the Court of Appeal confirmed that an employer is vicariously liable

In Weddall v Barchester Healthcare and Wallbank v Wallbank Fox Designs Ltd, the Court of Appeal confirmed that an employer is vicariously liable for an employee’s wrongdoings if the acts are so closely connected with employment that they are a wrongful way of carrying out authorised work.

In Weddal, Mr Marsh, a care home assistant, attacked Mr Weddal, the home’s deputy manager, after Mr Weddal phoned him at home to ask if he wanted to volunteer to work a night shift as another assistant was ill. In Wallbank, Mr Brown placed his hand on Mr Wallbank’s face and threw him onto a table, after Mr Wallbank had rightly indicated that Mr Brown should not work in a way, which wasted company resources.

The Court of Appeal confirmed that the question is whether the employee’s wrongdoing was so closely connected with his or her employment that it would be fair and just to hold the employer vicariously liable (responsible for another’s actions). If there is a connection, then the closeness of that connection has to be considered and judged by asking whether the acts can be seen as a wrongful way of carrying out authorised work.

In Weddall, the violence was Mr Marsh’s response to a valid request that he consider volunteering for a night shift. When he received the request, Mr Marsh was drunk and he went to the workplace with the purpose of inflicting serious violence on Mr Weddall. Mr Marsh was acting for his own reasons. The request to work the night shift was a pretext for an act of violence unconnected with work. The employer could not be held vicariously liable.

In Wallbank, not only was the violence used by Mr Brown closely related to employment in both time and space, it was a spontaneous response to a valid instruction given to him when he was carrying out his duties. A broad view has to be taken of the nature of ‘employment’ and what is reasonably related to the employee’s duties. In these circumstances the Court was persuaded that the employer could be held vicariously liable.

Read more

Latest News

Read More

The real business of giving back

31 July 2025

Workforce Planning

31 July 2025

Dmitry Zaytsev, founder of Dandelion Civilization, argues that HR should play a bigger role in shaping how education prepares young people for work. If we...

Leadership

29 July 2025

Leadership can feel lonely at times, but it shouldn’t. Have a little empathy for yourself and ask for help when you need it. Now more...

Newsletter

Receive the latest HR news and strategic content

Please note, as per the GDPR Legislation, we need to ensure you are ‘Opted In’ to receive updates from ‘theHRDIRECTOR’. We will NEVER sell, rent, share or give away your data to third parties. We only use it to send information about our products and updates within the HR space To see our Privacy Policy – click here

Latest HR Jobs

Queen Mary University of London – IT Services DirectorateSalary: £54,617 to £60,901 per annum This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered.

University of Sussex – Human Resources Salary: £25,733 to £29,179. Grade 4, per annum, pro rata if part time This provides summary information and comment

UCL – Chemistry Department / Faculty of Mathematical & Physical SciencesSalary: £54,172 to £63,752 This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered.

University of Oxford – Department of PsychiatrySalary: £31,459 to £36,616 (discretionary range to £39,749) per annum. Grade 5 This provides summary information and comment on

Read the latest digital issue of theHRDIRECTOR for FREE

Read the latest digital issue of theHRDIRECTOR for FREE