Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article examines the limits of employer liability for infectious diseases in the workplace, highlighting legal misunderstandings.
Government guidance published during the COVID-19 pandemic implied that employers owe a duty to protect their employees from the risk of infectious disease in the workplace. That employers owe a duty in respect of occupational disease – including occupational infectious disease – is well established. However, there is no authority to support the proposition that the employer’s duty extends to include infectious diseases in general circulation in the community (e.g. COVID-19, flu, measles). The Government’s guidance was therefore based on a misunderstanding of employers’ liability. This article argues that infectious diseases in general circulation are, and should remain, beyond the scope of the employer’s duty in English law.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
John Bridge Fanning (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: