Citation

Purshouse C. Med. Law Rev. 2020; ePub(ePub): ePub.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2020, Centre of Medical Law and Ethics, King's College London, Publisher Oxford University Press)

DOI

10.1093/medlaw/fwaa018

PMID

32892220

Abstract

In Barclays Bank plc v Various Claimants [2020] UKSC 13, the Supreme Court rejected the claimants' argument that Barclays should be vicariously liable for the sexual assaults of a doctor hired on as a contractor to perform medical examinations on employees and job candidates at the bank. It upheld the traditional rule that a defendant is not vicariously liable for the torts of independent contractors. This commentary examines the law on liability for independent contractors and considers whether the Supreme Court decision is consistent with modern employment trends. The implications of the decision for medical law are then discussed.

Language: en

Keywords

Doctors; Medical malpractice; The non-delegable duty of care; Torts; Vicarious liability