top of page
  • Writer's pictureRobert Spicer

Assault after Christmas Party

Assault after Christmas Party

Case Bellman v Northampton Recruitment Ltd [2017] IRLR 124, High Court

Facts B, an employee of N, went to the company’s Christmas party. After the party, a number of guests went on to a hotel and carried on drinking. The company’s managing director assaulted B in an unprovoked attack. He punched B twice. B struck his head on the floor and suffered serious brain damage. He claimed compensation from the company.

Decision 1. The company was not liable.

2. The assault was committed after and not during an organised work social event.

3. The managing director could not always be considered to be on duty.

4. There was a temporal and substantive difference between the Christmas party and the drinks at the hotel. Given the time and place, no objective observer would have seen any connection with the jobs of the employees present.

5. There was an insufficient connection between the position in which the managing director was employed and the assault to make it right for the comnay to be held liable.

Recent Posts

See All


Limitation Case TVZ v Manchester City Football Club Ltd [2022] EWHC 7, Hugh Court Facts Eight men who had been sexually abused by a football coach in the 1980s claimed compensation in negligence fro

Crown immunity and the rule of law (3)

Civil proceedings Until 1948 the Crown could not be made a party to a civil action. This was an offshoot of the principle of sovereign immunity. The Crown Proceedings Act 1947 changed this rule. The C

Crown immunity and the rule of law (2)

Recent examples In June 2018 prison officers were taking part in a petrol bomb training exercise. This was part of an eight-day commanders course at the National Tactical Response Group training facil


Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page