Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
    • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
    • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Employment lawCase law

Hawley v Luminar Leisure plc

by Personnel Today 12 Jul 2006
by Personnel Today 12 Jul 2006

Hawley v Luminar Leisure plc
Court of Appeal

Status of agency workers

Luminar owns and operates a number of clubs throughout the UK. It contracted with ASE Security Services (ASE) for “the provision of security services” at a nightclub. The relevant contract between Luminar and ASE provided for the supply of “door supervisors”.

One of the doormen was Mr Warren. Following an incident outside the nightclub, Warren punched Mr Hawley, causing significant and permanent brain damage.

Warren was convicted for the offence and Hawley issued proceedings for negligence against both Luminar, the company which owned the nightclub, and ASE, which employed and supplied the doormen.

The parties conceded that Warren had been acting in the course of his employment, but the issue was whether or not he was a ‘temporary deemed employee’ of Luminar, making it vicariously liable for his actions.

Vicarious liability

Employers are vicariously liable for the negligence of their employees. In a situation where a “general” employer provides an employee to a “temporary” employer, it is for the general employer to show that it is not vicariously liable, and the burden is a heavy one.

In this case, the Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the High Court – that a nightclub exercised sufficient control over the actions of a doorman supplied to it by a security company to deem the nightclub his “temporary” employer for the purposes of vicarious liability

Key points



  • A company can be vicariously liable for the negligent acts of another company’s employee where it can be shown to be the employee’s “deemed temporary employer” for the limited purpose of establishing vicarious liability.
  • Although ASE employed, paid and had the power to dismiss doormen, for all practical purposes, Luminar’s management exercised control over the provision of their services. There was sufficient evidence that Luminar was Warren’s temporary employer.

What you should do



  • Be aware that if you hire temporary workers and control what they do, you may be liable for their actions. An organisation that does not directly employ those who work on its behalf does not necessarily escape liability.
  • Make sure you properly train and supervise your hired staff.
  • Don’t assume your contractual arrangements will protect you from vicarious liability. The courts always look beyond strict contractual arrangements to examine what actually happens in practice when determining employment status. To address the risk, consider obtaining an indemnity from the worker’s general employer (in respect of vicarious liability you may face following negligence of the hired worker).

Avatar
Personnel Today

previous post
Crown Prosecution Service denies racism claim
next post
Work and pensions secretary, John Hutton, confident that job cuts at Department for Work and Pensions will not affect service delivery

You may also like

Long Covid: what tribunal’s disability ruling means for...

23 Jun 2022

Oxford study highlights best gig economy firms to...

9 Jun 2022

Tesco appeal against fire and rehire ban to...

8 Jun 2022

Bank holidays: six things employers need to know

5 Jun 2022

Frewer v Google: How it’s getting harder to...

30 May 2022

P&O Ferries boss denies reputational damage after mass...

27 May 2022

Employers lack data to make IR35 worker status...

25 May 2022

Maternity leave: Cost of living crisis highlights need...

25 May 2022

One in five employers planning ‘no jab no...

19 May 2022

MP demands timeline on carer’s leave legislation

13 May 2022
  • NSPCC revamps its learning strategy with child wellbeing at its heart PROMOTED | The NSPCC’s mission is to prevent abuse and neglect...Read more
  • Diversity versus inclusion: Why the difference matters PROMOTED | It’s possible for an environment to be diverse, but not inclusive...Read more
  • Five steps for organisations across the globe to become more skills-driven PROMOTED | The shift in the world of work has been felt across the globe...Read more
  • The future of workforce development PROMOTED | Northumbria University and partners share insight...Read more
  • Strathclyde Business School expands its Degree Apprenticeship offer in England PROMOTED | The University of Strathclyde is expanding its programmes...Read more
  • The Search for Talent: Six Major Employer Pitfalls PROMOTED | The Great Resignation continues unabated...Read more
  • Navigating the widening “Skills Confidence Gap” in 2022, and beyond PROMOTED | Cornerstone OnDemand conducted a global study...Read more
  • Apprenticeships are the solution to your recruitment problems PROMOTED | Apprenticeships have the pulling power...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2022

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2022 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
    • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+