header-logo header-logo

Liability: delivering the goods?

174059
An unusual case has served up questions about vicarious liability & the gig economy. Ross Fletcher looks at the takeaways
  • Examines a case concerning a self-employed Deliveroo rider who caused grievous bodily harm to a customer. Deliveroo has disputed liability.
  • Considers the case law to explore the relationship between the rider and Deliveroo, exploring how the law on vicarious liability may be applied to modern work situations.

Ordering takeaway pizza does not usually incur a risk of personal injury. However, the injury that occurred due to this activity led to criminal liability in R v Rocha, heard by Winchester Crown Court on 19 March 2024. In this article, I will consider the principles that may be relevant when determining civil liability in this case. Although the facts of this case are unusually uncommon (or at least, one would hope), these principles are of significance to the modern ‘gig economy’.

The pizza in question was ordered on 14 December 2022 by Stephen Jenkinson, who used the Deliveroo app to request that it be delivered to his home near Aldershot, Hampshire.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll