Viasystems (Tyneside) Ltd. v Thermal Transfer (Northern) Ltd & Ors [2005] EWCA Civ 1151 (10 October 2005)

Viasystems (Tyneside) Ltd. v Thermal Transfer (Northern) Ltd & Ors [2005] EWCA Civ 1151 (10 October 2005)

Where two employers each have the right, and in theory the obligation, to control the relevant negligent act of an employee, both may be held vicariously liable for that act. The long-standing assumption that only one employer can be liable is not supported by binding authority and does not reflect modern legal policy or practical realities. In this case, both the second and third defendants had sufficient control over Darren Strang's work to justify dual vicarious liability.

Citation
[2005] EWCA Civ 1151
Parties
Claimant: Viasystems (Tyneside) Ltd; First Defendant: Thermal Transfer (Northern) Limited; Second Defendant: S & P Darwell Limited; Third Defendant: T Hall & C Day t/a CAT Metalwork Services
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 October 2005
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part.
Legal Topics
Vicarious Liability, Dual Vicarious Liability, Borrowed Servant Doctrine, Contribution Between Tortfeasors
Tort Law Employment Law Vicarious Liability Dual Vicarious Liability Borrowed Servant Doctrine Contribution Between Tortfeasors

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Viasystems (Tyneside) Ltd

Claimant

Thermal Transfer (Northern) Limited

First Defendant

S & P Darwell Limited

Second Defendant

T Hall & C Day t/a CAT Metalwork Services

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether both the second and third defendants can be held vicariously liable for the negligence of a single employee (Darren Strang) under the doctrine of dual vicarious liability.
  2. 2 Whether the established legal principle precludes dual vicarious liability in cases of borrowed servants.
  3. 3 How contribution should be apportioned between defendants if dual vicarious liability is found.

Ratio Decidendi

Where two employers each have the right, and in theory the obligation, to control the relevant negligent act of an employee, both may be held vicariously liable for that act. The long-standing assumption that only one employer can be liable is not supported by binding authority and does not reflect modern legal policy or practical realities. In this case, both the second and third defendants had sufficient control over Darren Strang's work to justify dual vicarious liability.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part.

Orders

  • Both the second and third defendants are held vicariously liable to the claimants for Darren Strang's negligence.
  • As between the second and third defendants, there should be equal (50/50) contribution to the claimants' damages.