Supreme Court determines that an employer can be considered a 'user' of a vehicle through the actions of its employees, in a case where an employee was injured by equipment attached to a company vehicle. The High Court had previously found that the employer's liability must be insured under statute, but the Court of Appeal disagreed, stating that the employer was not the 'user' of the vehicle. The Supreme Court has now clarified that if an employee's injuries were caused by the negligence of the employer or any person for whose acts the employer was liable, and that negligence was related to the use of the vehicle, then the employer's liability to the employee is indeed covered by statute. The case has been resolved in favor of the plaintiff, with the Supreme Court finding that the employer's motor insurance policy must respond to the claim.
Employer liability, motor insurance policy, user of vehicle, employee injury, negligence, Road Traffic Acts, Supreme Court, indemnity, civil liability, agency, statutory construction, compulsory motor insurance obligation, Directive 2009/103/EC, control and management of vehicle, vicarious liability, Special Case procedure, interpretation of legislation.