## Facts

- Viasystems (Tyneside) Ltd owned a factory where flooding damage occurred during construction work.
- Thermal Transfer (Northern) Ltd, the main contractor, subcontracted installation tasks to CAT Metalwork Services.
- CAT employed a fitters’ mate, Mr. Strang, who was supervised by both CAT and Thermal Transfer personnel during installation of air conditioning units.
- Mr. Strang negligently caused flooding, leading to significant damage.
- Viasystems sued Thermal Transfer for compensation.
- Thermal Transfer argued that liability should rest with CAT, asserting CAT’s control over Mr. Strang.
- The court had to determine whether both employers could be held vicariously liable for Mr. Strang’s actions.

## Issues

1. Whether an employee can be under the control of two employers for the purposes of vicarious liability.
2. Whether vicarious liability can be shared between two employers where both exercise control and involvement over the employee.
3. How liability should be apportioned in modern employment settings such as subcontracting and joint ventures.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal found that both CAT and Thermal Transfer exercised significant control and involvement over Mr. Strang.
- It determined that dual vicarious liability can apply where two employers share relevant control and coordination of the employee’s work.
- Liability was not seen as all-or-nothing; it could be apportioned between both employers according to their respective involvement.
- The judgment recognized that such sharing of liability is fair and reflective of contemporary employment arrangements.

## Legal Principles

- Vicarious liability may attach to multiple employers where control and involvement are shared over an employee.
- The key determinants of liability are the degree of control exercised and the extent to which the employee is integrated into each employer’s business.
- The doctrine is flexible to accommodate modern practices, including temporary staffing, subcontracting, and joint ventures.
- Liability may be apportioned between employers rather than attributed solely to one.

## Conclusion

The Court of Appeal’s judgment in Viasystems v Thermal Transfer [2006] clarifies and extends the doctrine of vicarious liability, allowing for dual liability where two employers share control and involvement over an employee, ensuring fair allocation of responsibility in complex employment relationships.


Viasystems (Tyneside) Ltd v Thermal Transfer (Northern) Ltd [2006] 2 WLR 428 (CA)