Dear All,

Today the Court of Appeal have handed down judgment in Graham v Commercial Bodyworks, http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2015/47.html, another vicarious liability case in which the close connection test was examined, yet again, by an appellate court.

It is an entirely sensible decision in which the Court of Appeal upheld the judge at first instance to declare that there was no vicarious liability where an employee, for fun, applies thinner (a flammable fluid utilised as part of his job) to his friend and colleague’s overalls, and then sets him alight with a cigarette lighter.  That said, oddly the recent Supreme Court case of CCWS did not get a mention, particularly given that it deals with the second limb of vicarious liability and risk creation.

Kind regards,

Phillip Morgan

--