Accordingly, the defendant conclusively negated the element of tortious interference that requires a willful and intentional act -.

This was an intentional act designed to destroy all links with the areas these people had been living in.

Hence, in their hands pushing upwards, they are opening the window; opening a window being a description of the intentional act.

An intentional act would have required considerable confidential intelligence and luck that seems very unlikely.

Those cases arose from intentional acts at the workplace (whether horseplay or rather more serious conduct) and did not usually give rise to vicarious liability.