Tort chapt 5 vicarious liability from spec Flashcards
Define vicarious liability
The liability of 1 party for the wrongful acts of another but the original tortfeasor still remains liable (Hilton v Thomas Burton 1961)
Who will pay damages if vicarious liability is established?
An employer will be liable for the employees wrongful act.
The employee will also remain liable.
Other types of vicarious liability include partners in a business liable for each other’s wrong doing
What is the effect of vic Lia?
3 things
This imposes liability on one person for the torts of another
And the original tortfeasor remains liable
Employer may seek indemnity from d
What are the 3 requirements for establishing vicaroius liability?
Is it a tort?
Is it committed by an employee/akin to employment
Is it committed during the course of employment/ activity closely related?
Case law
Hilton v Thomas Briton 1971 (frolic)❌
Lister v hesley hall 2001 (closely connected)✅
Relevant case law to use for establishing vicarious liability (2)
“Frolic of own”
“Closely connected”
Hilton v Thomas Burton 1971❌
- not liable as on a “frolic of his own”
Lister v Hesley Hall 2001✅
- liable as was an activity “closely connected” with the tortfeasors role
What are the 3 tests for identifying employment status?
Control test- tell worker what to do
Yewens v Noakes 1880
Organisation test “part of the org”
Cassidy v minister of health 1951
Multiple test- “economic reality”/ all the circs
Ready mixed concrete v minister of pensions 1968
Hall v Lorimer 1992
Give a detailed list of why/why not for multiple and a conclusion
What is a relationship akin to employment?
Which case?
JGE v trustees of Portsmouth RC diocesan trust 2012
Establishment of employer where an employee is “lent”
Which case?
Mersey docks v coggins 1946- original employer remains liable✅
However-
Mersey Docks and Harbour Board v coggins 1946
Lent employee- to escape liability employer must show that Control was transferred to the borrowing employer
What is the position of casual, temp and agency workers?
1 case needed
In Carmichael v National Power 1999 hol said they are employees if there is “mutuality of obligation”
What is the position of priests?
1 case needed
In JGE V Trustees of Portsmouth RC diocesan trust 2012 CoA said that if the relationship is “akin to employment” then it could be fair to hold the org vicariously liable
Court can hold 2 orgs jointly liable for the same act
Which case?
Viasystems v Thermal transfer 2005
Can have joint vl
Would happen when 2 diff employers both had control of employee at time of negligent act
What is a frolic of ones own?
3 cases
Acting “outside the scope of his employment “
Hilton v Thomas burton 1961- emp not liable 👎
Kay v ITW ltd 1967- liable as doing job albeit badly 👍- to be not liable must be “outside the scope of his employment”
Lister v hesley hall-was liable as “closely connected” with role👍
Book definition of “in the course of employment”
- wrongful act authorised by emp
- lawful act authorised by emp but carried out in an unlawful/ unauthorised way
- must not be on a “frolic of his own” (Hilton v Thomas Burton)
- must be closely connected to his role in the org (lester v hesley hall)
