header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Insurance surgery: Working under cover

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
20 April 2016 / Sarah Wilkinson
Issue: 7698 / Categories: Features , Insurance surgery , Insurance / reinsurance
printer mail-detail

Sarah Wilkinson examines vicarious liability

Following two recent Supreme Court decisions, employers will be advised to closely review the fine detail of their liability cover. Against the backdrop of the rulings in Cox v Ministry of Justice [2016] UKSC 10, [2016] All ER (D) 25 (Mar) and Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets plc [2016] UKSC 11, [2016] All ER (D) 19 (Mar) it is essential that employers ensure vicarious liability is clearly defined and included in their policy wording to confirm that the policy covers all situations for which a business maybe be held vicariously liable.

The Supreme Court has re-examined the two-stage test for vicarious liability and has provided updated guidance on the development and application of the legal principle. While the court specifically sought not to open the floodgates, it has adopted a more liberal approach to the circumstances when an employer may be vicariously liable for the acts of an employee who has been negligent.

The boundaries have been pushed to allow the doctrine to reflect the realities and complexities

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Muckle LLP—Phoebe Gogarty

Muckle LLP—Phoebe Gogarty

North East firm welcomes employment specialist

Browne Jacobson—Colette Withey

Browne Jacobson—Colette Withey

Partner joins commercial and technology practice

Ellisons—Lizzy Firmin

Ellisons—Lizzy Firmin

Chief operating officer joins equity partnership

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Form N510—not just a box to tick
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold dives into the quirks of civil practice, from the Court of Appeal’s fierce defence of form N510 to fresh reminders about compliance and interest claims, in this week's Civil Way
NLJ this week: When high rates fall flat
In this week's NLJ, Sophie Houghton of LexisPSL distils the key lesson from recent costs cases: if you want to exceed guideline hourly rates (GHR), you must prove why
NLJ this week: Building digital bridges to justice
With chronic underfunding and rising demand leaving thousands without legal help, technology could transform access to justice—if handled wisely, writes Professor Sue Prince of the University of Exeter in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Delegation or dereliction?
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) has restated a fundamental truth, writes John Gould, chair of Russell-Cooke, in this week's NLJ: only authorised persons can conduct litigation. The decision sparked alarm, but Gould stresses it merely confirms the Legal Services Act 2007
NLJ this week: FCA faces its toughest test yet
The government’s decision to make the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) the Single Professional Services Supervisor marks a watershed in the UK’s fight against money laundering, says Rebecca Hughes of Corker Binning in this week's NLJ. The FCA will now oversee 60,000 firms across legal and accountancy sectors—a massive expansion of remit that raises questions over resources and readiness 
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll