Various Claimants v Catholic Child Welfare Society [2012] UKSC 56

Facts

  • The claimants alleged they were sexually abused by members of a religious order while residing in a children's home operated by the Catholic Child Welfare Society.
  • The defendants, including the Catholic Child Welfare Society, contended they could not be vicariously liable, as the religious order members were not formally employed by the society.
  • The relationship between the society and the religious order members was examined to determine if it was sufficiently close to an employment relationship to justify vicarious liability.
  • Factors considered included the level of control by the society over the religious order members, the nature of their activities, and the degree of inclusion within the society’s operations.

Issues

  1. Whether an unincorporated association such as a religious order can be held vicariously liable for the wrongful acts of its members in the absence of a formal employment contract.
  2. Whether the relationship between the Catholic Child Welfare Society and the religious order members was sufficiently akin to employment to justify the imposition of vicarious liability.
  3. What criteria should be used to assess whether a relationship is “akin to employment” for the purpose of vicarious liability.

Decision

  • The Supreme Court held that a formal employment contract is not required for vicarious liability to arise; a relationship akin to employment can suffice.
  • The relationship between the Catholic Child Welfare Society and the religious order members was found to be sufficiently close to employment due to significant control, close inclusion, and alignment of activities.
  • Vicarious liability could therefore be imposed on the society for wrongs committed by members of the religious order.
  • The judgment expanded the scope of vicarious liability to cover relationships beyond traditional employment structures.

Legal Principles

  • Vicarious liability may attach even in the absence of a formal employment contract if the relationship is akin to employment.
  • Elements such as control, inclusion within the organization, and alignment of activities are central to assessing whether a relationship is akin to employment.
  • The doctrine of vicarious liability serves public policy by ensuring victims have avenues for redress, regardless of technical employment status.
  • Prior cases, including Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd and Dubai Aluminium Co Ltd v Salaam, support a flexible, substance-over-form approach in vicarious liability assessments.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision in Various Claimants v Catholic Child Welfare Society [2012] UKSC 56 broadened the application of vicarious liability, establishing that entities may be liable for wrongful acts committed within relationships that are analogous to employment, even absent a formal contract, ensuring wider accountability and protection for victims.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal