Vicarious Liability and Conferred Authority: Trustees of the Barry Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses v BXB.
In Trustees of the Barry Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses v BXB, the Supreme Court held that there was a single approach to determining all cases of vicarious liability. No 'tailoring' of that approach was required either because the defendant was a religious organisation or because the tort in q...
| Published in: | Modern Law Review Vol. 87; no. 4; pp. 995 - 1010 |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Published: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Jul2024
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | View this record in EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=177903649&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 177903649 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00267961 D8H jtl: Modern Law Review issn: 00267961 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Jul2024 vid: 87 iid: 4 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell artinfo: ui: 177903649 10.1111/1468-2230.12877 ppf: 995 ppct: 15 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 161KB tig: atl: Vicarious Liability and Conferred Authority: Trustees of the Barry Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses v BXB. aug: au: Beuermann, Christine su: Name of God in Christianity Sex crimes Legal liability Defendants Appellate courts sug: subj: Name of God in Christianity Sex crimes Legal liability Defendants Appellate courts ab: In Trustees of the Barry Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses v BXB, the Supreme Court held that there was a single approach to determining all cases of vicarious liability. No 'tailoring' of that approach was required either because the defendant was a religious organisation or because the tort in question was sexual abuse. It followed that the Court of Appeal had erred in placing significance on the authority conferred by the defendant on the tortfeasor to guide the behaviour of the claimant when determining vicarious liability. This note explores whether there is any role for conferred authority after Barry. To accommodate distinctions in the existing cases and contain further unwarranted expansion, it is argued that it is necessary to recognise a discrete form of strict liability for the tort of another, distinct from vicarious liability, that responds to the potential for conferred authority to be abused. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Modern Law Review is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Modern Law Review holder: Wiley-Blackwell dt: @attributes: year: 2024 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|