In Morrison v Various Claimants, Morrisons was held by the Court of Appeal to be vicariously liable for the (criminal) acts of a disgruntled employee who from his home, months after unlawfully downloading it at work, posted the personal data of 100,000 Morrisons' employees on the internet. His acts were intended to cause harm to Morrisons.
Vicarious liability has always been problematic, but exposure and risk are now greater than ever before – the GDPR, for example, provides for penalties of up to 4% of turnover. It is hoped that the Supreme Court may provide some clarification - but Morrison is only part of the problem with the law and the recent massive expansion of potential liability.
This month Butterworths Journal of International Banking and Financial Law publishes Paul's article: English law of vicarious liability: off on a frolic of its own or the flight from principle?
If you would like to attend please email firstname.lastname@example.org