Case and Legislation Notes: The EBB and Flow of Vicarious Liability in Tort Law— Barclays Bank plc v Various Claimants; WM Morrison Supermarkets plc v Various Claimants

14 Pages Posted: 16 Jun 2021

See all articles by Wei Xuan Joel Fun

Wei Xuan Joel Fun

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Darien The

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Date Written: March 2021

Abstract

Vicarious liability claims have often stirred controversy, as liability is being imposed on a party which is not responsible for the tortious conduct. This is especially so, as the law on vicarious liability has been expanding over the past few years to include an increasing scope of relationships and circumstances. This case comment looks at two decisions of the United Kingdom Supreme Court in 2020 which took a step back from this expansionary approach and introduces new constraints. In examining the desirability of these changes and comparing them with the position in Singapore, it is hoped that new perspectives will be gained to clarify this unsettled area of the law.

Suggested Citation

Fun, Wei Xuan Joel and The, Darien Chun Yiu, Case and Legislation Notes: The EBB and Flow of Vicarious Liability in Tort Law— Barclays Bank plc v Various Claimants; WM Morrison Supermarkets plc v Various Claimants (March 2021). Singapore Journal of Legal Studies, Mar 2021, pp 206-219, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3861448

Wei Xuan Joel Fun (Contact Author)

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Darien Chun Yiu The

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
0
Abstract Views
77
PlumX Metrics