Sofola v Coles [2000] EWCA Civ 392 (13 November 2000)

Sofola v Coles [2000] EWCA Civ 392 (13 November 2000)

The respondent's act of striking the applicant through the open car window was an unreasonable and excessive response, not justified by self-defence, and amounted to battery. The bus company was not vicariously liable as the respondent acted outside the scope of employment.

Citation
[2000] EWCA Civ 392
Parties
Applicant: Abayomi Sofola; Respondent: John Coles; Defendant: London General Bus Company
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 November 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Battery, Self Defence, Vicarious Liability, Costs
Tort Personal Injury Battery Self Defence Vicarious Liability Costs

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abayomi Sofola

Applicant

John Coles

Respondent

London General Bus Company

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent committed battery against the applicant
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's actions were justified as self-defence
  3. 3 Whether the bus company was vicariously liable for the respondent's actions

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent's act of striking the applicant through the open car window was an unreasonable and excessive response, not justified by self-defence, and amounted to battery. The bus company was not vicariously liable as the respondent acted outside the scope of employment.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • judgment for the claimant (applicant) against the respondent in the sum of £100
  • costs here and below assessed in the sum of £200 to be paid by the respondent within 28 days