Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:04:32 +0100

From: Andrew Tettenborn

Subject: Two employers

A generation or two of lawyers have paid the school fees arguing when an employee is transferred, for the purposes of vicarious liability, under the Mersey Docks case. The CA has now, to some extent, short-circuited the process. In Viasystems (Tyneside) Ltd v Thermal Transfer (Northern) Ltd & Ors [2005] EWCA Civ 1151 (10 October 2005) some idiot of a fitter flooded a factory when he inadvertently interfered with the sprinkler system. He was employed by X, who had themselves been engaged on a labour-only basis by Y. The judge held that X were liable but Y weren't, effectively applying Mersey Docks. The CA, overturning a long-standing assumption, said "why shouldn't 2 people both count as employers?" and held both X and Y liable, with equal contribution from each. Equal because X and Y were personally without fault and there was no other sensible solution.

Happy hunting

Andrew

Andrew Tettenborn MA LLB
Bracton Professor of Law

Tel: 01392-263189 / +44-392-263189 (international)
Cellphone: 07870-130528 / +44-7870-130528 (international)
Fax: 01392-263196 / +44-392-263196 (international)

Snailmail: School of Law,
University of Exeter,
Amory Building,
Rennes Drive,
Exeter EX4 4RJ
England

Exeter Law School homepage: http://www.law.ex.ac.uk
My homepage: http://www.law.ex.ac.uk/staff/tettenborn.shtml

LAWYER, n. One skilled in circumvention of the law. (Ambrose Bierce, 1906).

<<<< Previous Message  ~  Index  ~  Next Message >>>>>