- Applied — MXX v A Secondary School 2023-08-25
“…no need to turn back continually to examine the underlying policy. This is not to deny that in difficult cases, and in line with what Lord Reed JSC said in Cox [2016] AC 660, having applied the tests to reach a provisional outcome on vicarious liability, it can be a useful final check on the justice of the outcome to stand back and…”
- Followed — Iris Hughes v Rajendra Rattan 2022-02-04
“…The judge cited the summary by Lord Reed JSC in Cox v Ministry of Justice[2016] UKSC 10; [2016] AC 660 of the approach of Lord Phillips in the Christian Brothers case as follows:-…”
- Cited — Natwest Markets Plc & Anor v Bilta (UK) Ltd & Ors 2021-05-10
“…The Supreme Court gave further guidance as to the five factors which had been identified by Lord Phillips PSC in Cox v Ministry of Justice [2016] AC 660. That was a case in which the Ministry of Justice was held vicariously liable for the negligence of a prisoner who dropped a heavy bag of rice on a catering ma…”
- Applied — Anderson & Ors v Sense Network Ltd 2019-07-31
“…advisors in recommending investment in the scheme. They submitted that, applying the decision of the Supreme Court in Cox v Ministry of Justice [2016] UKSC 10, [2016] AC 660, Sense created the risk of such tortious acts by entering into the AR Agreement and thereby exempting Midas from obtaining authorisation from the FCA.…”
- Cited — Group Seven Ltd & Anor v Notable Services LLP & Anor (Rev 2) 2019-04-11
“…ible to the claimant for the consequences of the wrongdoer’s conduct.” See Mohamud perLord Toulson at [1]. As Lord Reed JSC put it in Cox v Ministry of Justice [2016] AC 660, the companion appeal to Mohamud, at [2]:…”
- Cited — Winter v Hockley Mint Ltd 2018-11-15
“…rious Claimants v Catholic Child Welfare Society [2012] UKSC 56, [2013] 2 AC 1, as it was interpreted by Lord Reed in Cox v Ministry of Justice [2016] UKSC 10, [2016] AC 660, at [24, the Judge’s decision was wrong because the requisite two stage test is not satisfied in the circumstances of this case.…”
- Cited — Unite the Union v Nailard 2018-05-24
“…[2016] UKSC 10 [2016] AC 660 (p. 664 D-E).…”
- Considered — Kafagi v JBW Group Ltd 2018-05-18
“…These principles were next considered by the Supreme Court in Cox v Ministry of Justice [2016] UKSC 10; [2016] AC 660. In that case the claimant worked as the catering manager in a prison. She was moving supplies with the help of prisoners who were on prison service pay, when …”