Law of Tort- Vicarious Liability

Question 1

What is Vicarious Liability?

Answer 1

Liability passed from employee to employer

Question 2

Why is vicarious liability good?

Answer 2

The employer has more money than the employee, safety standards may be improved (deterrence) and the employer can afford to lose the money, whereas, the employee can’t

Question 2

What are the conditions for vicarious liability?

Answer 2

• A tort must be committed by an employee
• The tort must be committed within the course of the employee’s employment

Question 3

What is the Yewens v Noakes control test?

Answer 3

The control test establishes:
- How much control somebody has over somebody else.
- How did the employee do the work, what was done and the way that it was done

Question 4

What happened in Mersey Docks and Harbour Board v Coggins and Griffiths?

Answer 4

The Harbour Board were found liable, as they had control over the employee.

Question 5

What is the Jordan v Harrison integration test?

Answer 5

Lord Denning stated that: ‘if a person’s work is only an accessory, they are not an employee. Their work must be fully integrated.

So the integration test establishes whether or not someone is an employee, based on their value to the company. This test isn’t always certain.

Question 6

What was established in Performing Rights Society v Mitchell and Booker?

Answer 6

The nature and degree of the control

Question 7

What was established in Short v JW Henderson Ltd?

Answer 7

The power to select the servant, the right to suspend and dismiss, the payment of wages

Question 8

What was held in Hawley v Luminar Leisure?

Answer 8

The club was found to employ the bouncer, by the control test (Yewens v Noakes)

Question 9

What is the economic reality test used for?

Answer 9

To decide whether a person is an employee or an independent contractor

Question 10

If the employee is carrying out an authorised act, in the course of their employment, what will the employer be liable for?

Answer 10

• Wrongful act authorised by the employer
• An act, while authorised, was carried out in an unauthorised way

Question 11

What was held in Limpus v London General?

Answer 11

If an employee acts against orders, the employer will not be liable

Question 12

What was held in Beard v London General?

Answer 12

If the employee commits the tort outside of their employment, the employer will not be liable

Question 13

What was held in Mattis v Pollock?

Answer 13

If the employee commits a criminal act, the employer may still be liable

Question 14

What was held in N v Chief Constable?

Answer 14

Even though the officer used their uniform to gain the trust of the victim, they were acting outside of their employment, so the employer could not be vicariously liable

Question 15

What was held in Mohamud v Morrison’s Supermarket?

Answer 15

If an employee acts on a frolic of their own, the employer will be vicariously liable if there is sufficiently close connection

Question 16

What did McKenna J set out in Ready Mix Concrete v Minister of Pensions?

Answer 16

• Employment is work/skill in exchange for a wage/payment
• Employee accepts that the work is subject to employer’s control
• All other considerations are consistent with a contract of employment

Question 17

What was held in Carmichael v National Power?

Answer 17

No side had an obligation to each other, so she was not an employee

Question 18

What was held in Express and Echo Publications v Tanton?

Answer 18

The work was able to be delegated, so they were held to be independent contractors

Question 19

What are four factors of the Economic Reality Test?

Answer 19

• Is tax paid?
• Is the individual personally affected by decisions?
• Can the work be delegated?
• Are premises and equipment supplied?

Question 20

What was held in Cox v Ministry of Justice?

Answer 20

Recognised relationships that are ‘akin to employment’ may bring on vicarious liability

Question 21

What was held in Lister v Hesley Hall?

Answer 21

The close connection test is ‘whether the torts committed are so closely connected with employment that it is fair and just to hold the employers vicariously liable’.