In Bellman v Northampton Recruitment Ltd, after the firm’s Christmas party, some staff went to a hotel and were drinking alcohol, including M, the MD, and B a sales manager. M became annoyed when challenged about the appointment of an employee, K. He lectured everyone about how he owned the company, he made the decisions and he paid their wages. B raised K’s appointment again, whereupon M punched B twice, the second being a ‘sickening blow’ causing B to fall and hit his head. B sustained a fracture to his skull, leading to traumatic brain damage which resulted in him losing capacity to manage his own affairs. The High Court rejected B’s claim that the employer was vicariously liable, holding that the assault was after the firm’s Christmas party had ended, during an impromptu drink and was not a seamless extension the employer-organised event. The Court of Appeal upheld B’s appeal. Even if M had taken off his managerial hat when he first arrived at the hotel, he chose to don it and misuse his position when his decisions were challenged. Despite the time and place of the assault, there was a sufficient connection between M’s role and the attack to make it just that employer should be vicariously liable.

This update provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and help judgments made in every aspect of the case. Click on the links to access full details. If no link is provided, contact us for more information.  Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, SM&B cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.