Vicarious liability


Published by a UUÂãÁÄÖ±²¥ Corporate Crime expert
Practice notes

Vicarious liability


Published by a UUÂãÁÄÖ±²¥ Corporate Crime expert

Practice notes
imgtext

What is vicarious liability?

The general principle in criminal law is liability is personal not vicarious. This means that one person cannot be held liable for the crimes of another (other than where a person has aided, abetted, counselled or procured the act of another) (R v Huggins).

See Practice Note: Encouraging and assisting criminality.

There are exceptions to this general principle and, in some circumstances, liability can be transferred vicariously to another.

Vicarious liability for public nuisance

In R v Shorrock, the defendant was held to be vicariously liable for the common law offence of public nuisance having granted a licence over a field which was used for an event at which loud music was played which disturbed local residents. The defendant was not present at the event, but was found guilty of causing a public nuisance.

In R v Stephens the defendant, an owner of a quarry, was convicted of nuisance when his workmen (contrary to his instructions and without his knowledge) disposed of rubbish into a river which obstructed the navigation.

Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
Related legal acts:
Key definition:
Vicarious liability definition
What does Vicarious liability mean?

Criminal responsibility for the act or omission of another, usually an employee.

Read more readmore

Popular documents

Automatism

AutomatismThere is a distinction between insane and non-insane automatism; insane automatism, otherwise known as insanity, does not provide a complete defence but rather a special verdict of ‘not guilty by reason of insanity’. However, a defence of automatism provides a total of defence which

Dishonesty in the criminal law

Dishonesty in the criminal lawDishonesty provides the mens rea for multiple offences under statute and the common law. It is, however, not fully defined by statute. The exception is the Theft Act 1968 (TA 1968), which goes some way towards defining dishonesty but only insofar as certain offences

Recklessness in criminal cases

Recklessness in criminal casesThe subjective test for recklessnessCertain statutory and common law offences allow the prosecution to prove mens rea on the basis of ‘recklessness’. In essence, recklessness means the taking of an unjustified risk by the accused that leads to unlawful harm or

Transferred mens rea

Transferred mens reaThe principle of transferred malice/transferred mens reaThe Supreme Court has stated that a better description for transferred malice might be ‘transferred mens rea’. The term ‘transferred malice’ has been described as ‘a misleading label’.This article will refer to the principle