Please sign in with your existing account details.
Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.
Privacy statement - Terms and conditions
Forgotten your password?
You have exceeded the maximum number of login attempts for this email address and your account has been locked. An email has been sent to member of Browne Jacobson's web team and some one will be contacting you over the next two working days with details of how to change your password.
Are you sure you want to remove this item from you pinned content?
The concept of Assumption of Responsibility is on many stakeholders’ minds at the moment following the Supreme Court decision in CN & GN v Poole.
We anticipate that asserting a cross over between Assumption of Responsibility and Vicarious Liability could become increasingly prevalent. With the outsourcing of public services, contractual issues will also enter the mix.
Last month in Ohoud Al Najar & Ors v Cumberland Hotel Ltd [2019] EWHC 1593 (QB) the court found that an hotel assumed a responsibility to take reasonable care to protect guests from the criminal acts of third parties. In this case a thief had been disturbed and had violently attacked these guests. However the court found that the assumed duty was not absolute; it was simply to take reasonable care. On the facts the Defendant had not breached any duty to these claimants; its security systems and procedures were sufficient but would not exclude every unfortunate eventuality.
Next week the Supreme Court will be handing down judgement in X v Kuoni Travel. X was raped by a uniformed hotel electrician who had offered to show her a shortcut to reception, but had led her to an engineering room where the rape had taken place. The issue the Supreme Court will rule on is whether a travel company can be liable for 'improper performance' of the contract and Package Travel, Package Holidays and Package Tours Regulations (SI 1992/3288). We suspect the outcome will be dependent on a detailed analysis of the pleaded facts. Our briefing note on the case and the possible impact on Defendants facing assault and abuse claims will follow next week.
The much anticipated revision of the discount rate has arrived with the Lord Chancellor, David Gauke, announcing that it will be fixed at -0.25%.
View blog
In Rogerson v Bolsover District Council (2019) the Court of Appeal found against a local authority landlord pursuant to the Defective Premises Act 1972 following a finding of an inadequate inspection regime.
Consent in abuse claims has long been a controversial and difficult subject to broach. Many organisations have been criticised for raising the issue.
The UK court has recently clarified the law in relation to causation and loss in broker’s negligence claims in the case of Dalamd Limited v Butterworth Spengler Commercial Limited [2018] EWHC 2558.
Partner
Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.
Sign up