This is a preview. To continue reading please log in or Register to read this article

Vicarious liability: Employer vicariously liable for "doorman's" assault on customer

This report relates to 1 case(s)

  • expand disabled

    Mattis v Pollock (t/a Flamingo’s Nightclub) [2003] IRLR 603 CA (0 other reports)

Key Points

  • In Mattis v Pollock (t/a Flamingo's Nightclub), the Court of Appeal holds that a nightclub owner was vicariously liable for the actions of his door supervisor whose aggression culminated in the stabbing of a customer of the club outside the club premises, notwithstanding that, before the assault, the employee had left the club, returned to his home to arm himself with a knife and had then attacked the customer in an act of personal vengeance.
  • The test to be applied in determining whether an employer is vicariously liable is whether or not the assault was so closely connected with what the employer authorised or expected of the employee that it would be fair and just to find that it was liable.