- Allen v. Flood
"Allen v. Flood" [1898] AC 1 is a leading case in
English law on intentionally inflicted economic loss. A trade union official told an employer his members would not work alongside the claimants. The employer was pressured to get rid of the claimants. For the loss of work, the claimants sued the trade union official. An important fact is that all the workers in the case were only hired day by day. Therefore, the trade union official had never threatened abreach of contract because the contracts began afresh with a new day's work.The House of Lords held that even though there was a malicious motive, this could not render the conduct unlawful, because the effect actually complained of (not rehiring) was in itself entirely lawful.
Appraisal
"Allen v. Flood" has come under criticism in some quarters. In another leading
tort case in the context of unionstrike action , "Rookes v. Barnard " [ [1964] AC 1129, [1964] 1 All ER 367] ,Lord Devlin expressed disapproval. [see also, Patrick Devlin, "Samples of Law-Making" (1962) 10-13.] However "Allen v. Flood" was approved by the House of Lords in the recent case of "OBG v. Allan." [ [2008] 1 AC 1, [2007] UKHL 21.]ee also
*
Labour law
*Contract law Notes
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.
