- Approved — MXX v A Secondary School 2023-08-25
“…loyment or quasi-employment. This is the test, subject to two minor adjustments, set out by Lord Nicholls in Dubai Aluminium [2003] 2 AC 366, drawing on Lister [2002] 1 AC 215, and firmly approved in Morrison. The first adjustment is that, to be comprehensive, it is necessary to expand the test to include ‘quasi-employment’ as one ma…”
- Cited — London Borough of Haringey v FZO 2020-02-18
“…uels [1963] 1 WLR 991, 1004 included in the citation from Rose v Plenty [1976] 1 WLR 141, 147-148 (at para 38 above) and cited also in Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2002] 1 AC 215 by Lord Steyn at para 20, Lord Clyde, at para 42, Lord Hobhouse, at para 58 and Lord Millett, at para 77.…”
- Cited — Group Seven Ltd & Anor v Notable Services LLP & Anor (Rev 2) 2019-04-11
“…m of the Judge’s choice of the “close connection” test or of his analysis of the relevant legal principles by reference principally to Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2002] 1 AC 215, Dubai Aluminium CoLtd v Salaam [2003] 2 AC 366 and Mohamud v Wm Morrison Supermarkets plc [2016] AC 677, including in particular Lord Toulson’s most recent ex…”
- Cited — Group Seven Ltd & Anor v Notable Services LLP & Anor (Rev 2) 2019-04-11
“…[2002] 1 AC 215…”
- Doubted — Group Seven Ltd & Anor v Notable Services LLP & Anor (Rev 2) 2019-04-11
“…It is not in dispute that “the sufficient connection test” developed in Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2002] 1 AC 215, applied in the Dubai Aluminium case and most recently in the Mohamud case and the social policy behind it, applies in this case. There is also no doubt that M…”
- Considered — Winter v Hockley Mint Ltd 2018-11-15
“…The Judge referred to Armagas Ltd v Mundogas SA [1986] 1 AC 717 and Lister v Hesley Hall [2001] UKHL 22, [2002] 1 AC 215 and considered (at [38], [43] and [46]) that they suggested that at least one of the relevant tests is whether it is just and fair for liability to be imposed …”
- Cited — Winter v Hockley Mint Ltd 2018-11-15
“…rious liability of a principal or an employer for reasons other than actual authority, namely Armagas Ltd v Mundogas SA [1986] AC 717, Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2002] 1 AC 215 and Dubai Aluminium Co Ltd v Salaam [2002] UKHL 48. We comment on those cases below.…”
- Cited — The Catholic Child Welfare Society (Diocese of Middlesbrough) & Ors v CD 2018-10-23
“…cant element of prejudice that they have suffered is a change in the law. First, the decision of the House of Lords in Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2001] UKHL 22, [2002] 1 AC 215 considerably expanded the scope of vicarious liability. Second, the decision of the House of Lords in A v Hoare to depart from its earlier decision in Stubbing…”
- Cited — WM Morrison Supermarkets Plc v Various Claimants 2018-10-22
“…mer and representative of the petrol company to that of a person making a complaint to the police and the subject of the complaint. In Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2002] 1 AC 215 Lord Millett commented, at para 80, that “the better view may have been that the employer was not liable because it was no part of the duties of the pump atten…”
- Doubted — WM Morrison Supermarkets Plc v Various Claimants 2018-10-22
“…It is no doubt true that, as Lord Clyde said in Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2002] 1 AC 215 at 235, the time and place at which the act or acts occurred will always be relevant, though not conclusive. Nevertheless, there are numerous cases in which em…”
- Followed — Bellman v Northampton Recruitment Ltd 2018-10-11
“…our attention to the emphasis placed upon context and the circumstances in which the act occurred by Lord Clyde in his speech in Lister & Ors v Hesley Hall Ltd [2002] 1 AC 215 at [43] and [44]. The relevant passages are as follows:…”
- Cited — Frederick & Ors v Positive Solutions (Financial Services) Ltd 2018-03-13
“…n a number of appellate decisions. For present purposes it is only necessary to refer to what Lord Millett said in Lister v Hesley Hall Limited [2001] UKHL 22; [2002] 1 AC 215 at [65]:…”