Posted By Del Leslie-Dell Please could any confirm that, If a driver from a contracted company was to volunteer of his own back to unload a trailer, reports to his own company the next day for work, then during that day says he can not continue to work as he hurt him self when unloading yesterday on my premises. he admits that no-one asked him to help, he volunteered himself. does this come under Volenti non-fit injuria.

Posted By Ron Hunter apologies for the spelling!

Posted By Alan Hoskins Del, That defence would require a complete freedom of choice to apply, and as Chris J points out above, that cannot be the case in an employer/employee relationship. Alan

Posted By Pete Longworth Sorry, but I can't see how volenti would apply in this case. As for the claim, I guess it would depend on a number of factors. What procedures did the driver's employers have to govern loading / unloading at client's premises? How were these procedures communicated, monitored and controlled? The same questions could be asked for the client's procedures for unloading. It looks like shared liability to me.

Posted By ITK Vicarious Liability, unless you can prove he was on a frolic. ITK

Posted By Chris Jerman Hmm, Brando, that's a little tricky. You see, both the manager and the salesperson are both employees and both at work. The spirit behind VNFI is really not geared toward employment situations. If a member of the public out walking their pooch intervened in the robbery, well that could well be VNFI, but remember that it's a civil test to establish a common law duty of care and not a criminal test to establish breach of statutory duty. OK, you'd have a hard time arguing that the salesperson had been knowingly sent to an unsafe place of work by his employer and that the site owner failed in their duty to provide safe premises for those visiting. Well, maybe unless the premise was a security deposit facility in which case robbery would be perfectly reasonably foreseeable, of course! Just a stab here (no pun intended) but isn't this partly where the criminal injuries compensation board comes in? ie where there's a no fault liability injury? Not as part of the answer to the original thought about criminal liability, just a question as to what happens in the case that no-one (other than the burgler) was at fault Chris

Posted By Phil Grace Del, I agree with all the comments - this is not a volenti situation. But it is not a case of vicarious liability either (as per ITK). There seems to be much misunderstanding about vicarious liability. If one employee injures another the injured party has a right to sue that employee - he does not because that person has no assets. It is a long established legal principle that the EMPLOYER is vicariously liable for the actions of his employees - so the injured person sues the employer not the other employee. A hint to remembering this - think of the common law duty of care requiring the employer to supply competent fellow employees. Hope that helps Phil

Posted By Tabs Accident at work. Very unlikely to be described any other way by a court.