Articles and Publications
Employees could be personally liable for anti-competitive acts
18/Feb/2010
Employees could be personally liable for anti-competitive acts.
The so called "Bank Robber" principle has long been commonplace in the English legal system. This is the principle that a bank robber injured in a car crash cannot sue the getaway driver. This principle has been questioned in a recent case where a supermarket brought proceedings against ex directors.
It has long been thought that a business is not able to pursue employees for anti-competitive acts even if there is strong evidence to show they are responsible. The Office of Fair Trading "OFT" handed out over £200 million in fines last year for anti-competitive behaviour, all of which companies were responsible for. The OFT has never been able to fine individuals so the business has always had to foot the bill.
Safeway was fined over the price of its dairy products. The company issued proceedings to recover the money by suing 8 former staff and directors. The 8 argued that they could not be sued because the company committed the illegal act. The High Court Judge in the case commented that "Safeway had a good chance of defeating the Bank Robber principle at a full trial".
The 8 employees will not necessarily be held responsible, but the fact that the case has even be allowed to continue against them is a significant turnaround.
The case could pose serious problems for the OFT as they rely heavily on companies co-operating when pursuing such actions. In turn an employer will not be able to fully cooperate with the OFT without the co-operation of its staff. If employees feel that once the employer has managed to keep the OFT happy, it will then attempt to sue them to recoup fines they are obviously going to be less likely to help.
Claims against ex employees are rare but this case shows that where there is an illegal act the court may allow such claims to proceed. We await developments in this case.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions expressed in all Lee & Priestley LLP articles contained in our briefings and on our website - http://www.leepriestley.com are not necessarily comprehensive and should not be relied upon without taking in-depth professional advice.
