What do businesses need to know when it comes to outsourced staff and liability? Our team of employment law experts takes a look at a recent case that could provide guidance.
In Stephanus Bernardus Burger v Risk Solutions BG Limited & Anor [2026] EWCA Civ 804, the Court of Appeal revisited the limits of vicarious liability where a business uses an external contractor. The case arose after Mr Burger suffered a serious injury outside a J D Wetherspoon pub in Guildford in August 2018. Door supervisors involved in the incident were employed by Risk Solutions BG Limited – a specialist security contractor engaged by J D Wetherspoon to provide door security services.
Risk Solutions later became insolvent and dissolved, leaving J D Wetherspoon as the only defendant. The County Court found that the door supervisors had committed an unlawful assault and held J D Wetherspoon vicariously liable, awarding damages to the claimant. That decision was overturned on appeal to the High Court, and the claimant then appealed to the Court of Appeal.
The central question was whether J D Wetherspoon could be liable for torts committed by individuals who were not its employees but were employed by an independent contractor. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and held that Risk Solutions was a genuine independent contractor operating its own business and exercised management, direction and control over its staff. The fact that the door supervisors worked at J D Wetherspoon’s premises and performed a function beneficial to its business did not mean they were its employees or suggest a relationship with J D Wetherspoon that was “akin to employment.”
The judgment confirms that the modern expansion of vicarious liability has not replaced the traditional rule that a business is not generally liable for the wrongdoing of a true independent contractor, or that contractor’s employees. For businesses, the decision is a useful reminder that carefully structured outsourcing arrangements and contracts can preserve the independent contractor defence. The case therefore provides important clarification on the boundary between outsourcing and employment-type responsibility.
If you have any questions relating to bonuses – or anything else that relates to employment law – please don’t hesitate to get in touch with our expert team.
Our Legal 500-rated employment law & business immigration team are experts in guiding businesses of all sizes and backgrounds through a range of issues that may arise.
Disclaimer: All legal information is correct at the time of publication but please be aware that laws may change over time. This article contains general legal information but should not be relied upon as legal advice. Please seek professional legal advice about your specific situation - contact us; we’d be delighted to help.
