Abstract
This article considers the recent High Court decision which, by majority, rejected the suggestion that vicarious liability could apply to relationships that were sufficiently 'akin' to employment. One of the reasons given for doing so was that it would be more consistent with prior High Court authority. Though no previous High Court authority had directly considered the question, this article considers what was said in cases prior to Bird that might shed light on the issue.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 376-391 |
| Number of pages | 16 |
| Journal | Tort Law Review |
| Volume | 29 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| Publication status | Published - 2025 |