Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 27 NOVEMBER 2015

Foxed Again

Where a first-team goalkeeper assaults a youth trainee in the changing rooms at a football club, it may have been thought that the club would be vicariously liable for the goalkeeper's actions. In the recent case of GB v Stoke City Football Club & Peter Fox [2015] EWHC 2862, the court held that this was not the case.

United KingdomLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Peter Fox was the first team goalkeeper for Stoke City in the 1980s. He achieved a somewhat legendary status over his 447 appearances and went by the nickname Fantastic Mr Fox. The claimant, a youth trainee, alleged that he had been assaulted by Mr Fox, from which he developed PTSD. The alleged assault involved penetration of his anus by Mr Fox using a gloved finger smeared in a Deep Heat-like substance.

This claim failed as the claimant did not prove that the assaults happened. As such, there was no need for the court to consider the club's vicarious liability. However, Judge Butler proceeded to do so, and his comments are interesting.

Proceeding on the hypothesis that Mr Fox's actions were proven, the question was whether the court was satisfied that these actions were so closely connected with his employment that it would be fair and just to hold the employer vicariously liable. Judge Butler held that they were not.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from