- Cited — MXX v A Secondary School 2023-08-25
“…of authorities beginning with The Catholic Child Welfare Society v Various Claimants (FC) and The Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools and others [2012] UKSC 56 Lord Phillips at paragraph 47. Stage one: was PXM in a relationship with the defendant that was akin to that between an employer and employee? [177] Stage two:…”
- Considered — MXX v A Secondary School 2023-08-25
“…The two stage test for vicarious liability was identified by Lord Phillips in Various Claimants v Catholic Child Welfare Society and others [2012] UKSC 56 (“Christian Brothers”) at para 21: (i) The first stage is to consider the relationship of the defendant and the tortfeasor to see whether it is one that is cap…”
- Cited — Iris Hughes v Rajendra Rattan 2022-02-04
“…rom independent contractors. She went on to cite from the judgment of Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers PSC in Various Claimants v Catholic Child Welfare Society[2012] UKSC 56, [2013] 2 AC 1, generally known as the Christian Brothers case. Lord Phillips identified at [35] the policy reasons that usually make it fair, just and reasona…”
- Cited — Barry Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses v BXB 2021-03-15
“…Catholic Child Welfare Society and Others v Various Claimants and the Institute of Brothers of the Christian Schools and Others [2012] UKSC 56 (“Christian Brothers”)…”
- Cited — London Borough of Haringey v FZO 2020-02-18
“…“two stage test” for vicarious liability emerging from the recent decisions in the Supreme Court: Various Claimants v Catholic Child Welfare Society and others [2012] UKSC 56 at [21], per Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, and Mohammed v Wm Morrison Supermarkets plc [2016] UKSC 11 at [44] and [45] per Lord Toulson.…”
- Cited — London Borough of Haringey v FZO 2020-02-18
“…ship between the School and D1 was, for this purpose, sufficiently close to the negligent driving of D1 on the occasion in question: see again Lord Phillips at [2012] UKSC 56 at [21]. On the simple facts postulated by the Appellant, as suggested, the answer would be negative. If, however, C had been injured as envisaged while being …”
- Cited — Winter v Hockley Mint Ltd 2018-11-15
“… to a unitary modern law of vicarious liability in all cases, as set out in the judgment of Lord Phillips in Various 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 t…”
- Cited — The Catholic Child Welfare Society (Diocese of Middlesbrough) & Ors v CD 2018-10-23
“…was dealt with as a preliminary issue. It was not until the Supreme Court gave judgment on 21 November 2010 (Various Claimants v Catholic Child Welfare Society [2012] UKSC 56, [2013] AC 1) that that issue was finally resolved in the claimants’ favour.…”
- Cited — WM Morrison Supermarkets Plc v Various Claimants 2018-10-22
“…61, 571, Ready-Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions and National Insurance [1968] 2 QB 497), and Various Claimants v Catholic Child Welfare Society and others [2012] UKSC 56, [2013] 2 A.C. 1. The Judge held (at [197) that, adopting the broad and evaluative approach encouraged by Lord Toulson in Mohamud, there was a sufficient conne…”
- Cited — Barclays Bank Plc v Various Claimants 2018-07-17
“… the confines of a contract of service”: paragraph 73. She noted the similar observation of Lord Phillips in Catholic Child Welfare Society v Various Claimants [2012] UKSC 56 at paragraph 19. She noted the approval Lord Phillips accorded to the analysis of Hughes LJ (as he then was) in the Court of Appeal judgment in that case, to t…”
- Cited — Kafagi v JBW Group Ltd 2018-05-18
“…[2012] UKSC 56.…”
- Cited — Kafagi v JBW Group Ltd 2018-05-18
“…The first of the main authorities to which it is necessary to refer is the decision of the Supreme Court in Various Claimants v Catholic Child Welfare Society [2012] UKSC 56; [2013] 2 AC 1. That case is sometimes called the “Christian Brothers” case and concerned an institute which was a lay Roman Catholic Order, whose mission was …”
- Cited — Frederick & Ors v Positive Solutions (Financial Services) Ltd 2018-03-13
“…the relevant starting point in the modern jurisprudence is the judgment of Lord Phillips PSC in Various Claimants and Catholic Child Welfare Society and Others [2012] UKSC 56 (the Christian Brothers case).…”
- Applied — Frederick & Ors v Positive Solutions (Financial Services) Ltd 2018-03-13
“…t test to apply when determining whether vicarious liability should attach as a result of having misunderstood or mis-stated the guidance in Christian Brothers [2012] UKSC 56 as re-stated by Lord Reed in Cox v Ministry of Justice [2016] UKSC 10;…”