0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

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?

Cercato-Gouveia v Kyprianou and Another, Court of Appeal, 30 November 2001

14 December 2001
The issues

Summary Judgment whether appropriate in respect of claim involving vicarious liability on the part of an employer

The facts

The Defendant succeeded in Application for Summary Judgment against Claimant. Claimant appealed.

The Claimant was a Waiter and was sacked following an incident at work. In the course of the incident, his Manager assaulted him injuring the Claimant’s finger. He sued his employer, seeking damages for wrongful dismissal and assault. The Defendant applied for Summary Judgment in respect of the assault claim.

The decision

1. The Judge had found that it was wholly unarguable that the Manager had any authority to assault the employee and that therefore there was no prospect of the Claimant succeeding in the assault claim as against his employer on the basis of the employer’s vicarious liability.

2. A decision had been made before Lister -v- Hesley Hall Limited.

3. The employer owed the usual duty of care to the employee, which duty reposed in the Manager.

4. His duties included responsibility for discipline of staff. The assault took place within working hours and at the hotel and in the course of disciplinary action. The assault had taken place shortly after the Claimant had been dismissed and therefore the assault was part and parcel of what the Manager was employed to do.

Cases involving vicarious liability of employers were “fact-sensitive”.

It could not be said that there was no real prospect of success. There was on the face of it a close connection between the assault committed by the Manager and the Claimant’s employment. This could only be dealt with after a Trial and a full examination of the evidence.

Appeal allowed.

Focus on...

Legal updates

Gosden and another v Halliwell Landau and another [2021] EWHC 159 (Comm)

This claim addressed the question, of when the date for assessment of damages in cases of negligence should be determined and shows that when appropriate the Courts will depart from the default position.


Legal updates

Assessing the scope of employers liability – Chell v Tarmac

These were the opening remarks of Mr Justice Martin Spencer when handing down his Judgment in the recent case of Andrew Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Limited [2020] EWHC 2613, the latest in a series of appeals dealing with the scope of vicarious liability.


Legal updates

Non-payment of insurance premiums during the Coronavirus pandemic

The forced closure of many businesses as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic has had a huge impact on the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Recent reports from the Office for National Statistics state that the economy was 25% smaller in April than it was in February this year.


Legal updates

Reinstatement for property damage losses – when does it apply?

The Court of Appeal has recently considered the correct test for measuring the indemnity for property damage losses and has provided useful guidance on whether an insured needs to intend to reinstate the property to its pre-loss condition.


The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up