REWARD INSIGHT
Staff assault, rest breaks, disciplinary warnings
Nicola Mullineux, senior employment specialist for Peninsula, reviews decisions in three cases
Bellman v Northampton Recruitment Ltd
around half the guests went on to a local hotel; most were staying at the hotel but others went along as an unplanned extension of the party. Along with alcohol consumed at the official party, more drinks were consumed at the hotel. The conversation at the hotel was general social talk until around 2 a.m. when talk turned to work, including plans for the following year. Work continued to be talked about and the claimant brought up the subject of the newest member of staff’s employment. In disputed circumstances, the MD assaulted the claimant by punching him twice. The second punch knocked the claimant to the ground and he hit his head. This caused a brain injury which left the claimant suffering from side effects including headaches, low moods, deficits in verbal memory and speech and language impairment. He is unlikely to return to paid employment. The claimant brought a claim for damages against the company on the grounds it was vicariously liable for the actions of its employee.
The High Court applied the principles from previous cases on this issue. These include the idea that an employer is not liable for an assault by an employee because it happened during working hours or is not automatically free from liability because it happened outside normal working hours. Instead, the nature of the job of the employee needs to be identified and then the circumstances examined to determine whether there is a sufficient connection between their position and their wrongful conduct to make the employer liable. The High Court judged that the employer was not liable for the actions of the MD. Although his role meant he was in overall charge of the small company and it would have been part of his role to oversee the events of the party, his role did not require him to always be on duty when he was in the company of other employees. As to whether there was a sufficient link between his employment and the wrongful conduct, the assault happened after the work social event at an impromptu, voluntary gathering that could not be reasonably seen as an extension of the original party. Although work talk occurred at the later gathering, this did not
Employers often have to deal with the fallout from their organised staff events and gatherings. Employers can be found to be vicariously liable for the actions of an employee at these events if they are acting in the course of their employment. The High Court recently heard a case concerning an altercation that took place during the aftermath of an organised Christmas party. In late 2010, the claimant was offered a role with the defendant company by the managing director (MD) who was a childhood friend. The claimant’s role was to recruit commercial drivers and place them with clients. A short while later, another member of staff was recruited and word spread through the company that he was being paid more than other members of staff. The defendants planned their Christmas party at a nearby golf club. All members of staff and partners were invited and 24 people attended. After the party ended,
...the employer was not liable for the actions of the MD
30
| Professional in Payroll, Pensions and Reward | February 2017 | Issue 27
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker