ABSTRACT
In Barclays Bank plc v Various Claimants [2020] UKSC 13, the Supreme Court rejected the claimants’ argument that Barclays should be vicariously liable for the sexual assaults of a doctor hired on as a contractor to perform medical examinations on employees and job candidates at the bank. It upheld the traditional rule that a defendant is not vicariously liable for the torts of independent contractors. This commentary examines the law on liability for independent contractors and considers whether the Supreme Court decision is consistent with modern employment trends. The implications of the decision for medical law are then discussed.
€
Craig Purshouse, Halting The Vicarious Liability Juggernaut: Barclays Bank Plc v Various Claimants, Medical Law Review, https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwaa018. Published: 6 September 2020.
First posted 2020-09-11 04:40:46
Leave a Reply