USC [2016] UKSC 10
Cox v Ministry of Justice
Type
Case
Court
UK Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Dubai International Financial Centre
Taxonomy
Sentencing Powers & General Principles of Sentencing, Damages in Personal Injury, Appeals, Crown & Royal Prerogative
Decision date
2 Mar 2016
Catchwords
Vicarious Liability – Crown – Liability for Prisoner's Negligence – Respondent Prison Catering Manager Suffering Injury Caused by Negligence of Prisoner – Respondent Issuing Proceedings Against Appellant for Damages for Personal Injury – Judge Dismissing Claim As Appellant Not Vicariously Liable for Prisoner's Negligence – Respondent's Appeal Against Decision Being Allowed – Appellant Appealing – Whether Appellant Vicariously Liable
This case relates to Article 15 of DIFC Law No. 5/2005.
Vicarious liability – Crown. The Supreme Court, in dismissing the appellant's appeal, held that the respondent had been injured as a result of negligence by a prisoner in carrying on the activities assigned to him, and the prison service was, therefore, vicariously liable to her. The court considered what sort of relationship had to exist between an individual and a defendant before the defendant could be made vicariously liable in tort for the conduct of the individual, with particular regard to Various claimants v Catholic Child Welfare Society ([2013] 1 All ER 670).