Tort-Negligence-Vicarious Liability

Question 1

What does vicarious liability mean?

Answer 1

Where one person is liable for the tort of another

Question 2

What is vicarious liability an example of?

Answer 2

Strict liability

Question 3

What vicarious liability will be studied for the A-level?

Answer 3

Employer liability for the actions of their employees

Question 4

Reasons for vicarious liability.

Answer 4

So C can receive damages-employee may not have resources to pay

So C can receive damaged even if he does not know which employee was negligent e.g., during operation

To encourage employers be careful

Question 5

Evaluate the liability of the employee in vicarious liability.

Answer 5

Employer and employee can both be liable, though C more likely to sue employer as they have resources

Question 6

How many test are there for vicarious liability overall?

Answer 6

3

Question 7

3 overall tests for vicarious liability

Answer 7

1. Employee has committed a tort
2. Worker concerned has employee status
3. Tort occurred during the course of his employment

Question 8

What rules apply for the 1st test of vicarious liability?

Answer 8

Nomal rules of duty, breach and causation should be discussed

Question 9

What does the 2nd test of vicarious liability mean?

Answer 9

Vicarious liability exists for employees but not for independent contractors

Question 10

What tests were initially use to see if the worker concerned was an employee or contractor?

Answer 10

Control tests and then integration test

Question 11

Because the previous tests were inadequate in determining whether the worker concerned had employee status, what 3 multiple sub-tests are now used?

Answer 11

1. Control
2. Personal performance
3. Mutual obligation

Question 12

What does the control sub-test mean for the 2nd test?

Answer 12

Is the employer to some degree in charge of the worker and the work they are carrying out?

Question 13

What does the personal performance sub-test mean for the 2nd test?

Answer 13

Is the individual concerned expected to do the job himself or can he delegate it to someone else?

Question 14

Case for personal performance sub-test.

Answer 14

Echo and Express Publication v Tanton (1999)

Question 15

Facts of Echo and Express Publication.

Answer 15

CoA said a van driver who was able to employ someone else to do his job if he was unavailable, was a contractor

Question 16

What does the mutual obligation sub-test mean for the 2nd test?

Answer 16

Does the employer have a legal obligation to the worker and the worker have an obligation (duty) to work for certain hours?

Question 17

Case for mutual obligation sub-test.

Answer 17

Carmichael v National Power (1999)

Question 18

Facts of Carmichael v National Power (1999).

Answer 18

Worker, a tour guide at a power station, who the company contacted when they wanted her services, she could turn down the work if she wished.
Deemed a contractor

Question 19

What sub-test, which is not official for the 2nd test, might be considerd?

Answer 19

What the contract says

Question 20

What are the courts aware of the unofficial sub-test of what the contract says?

Answer 20

The contract might endeavour to make employees look like contractors when this does not affect reality

Question 21

Case for unofficial sub-test of 2nd test.

Answer 21

Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher (1999)

Question 22

Facts of Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher (1999).

Answer 22

Valeters for a car cleaning business with contractors saying they could work irregular hours and send substitutes.
In reality, though, they were treated as employers not contractors.

Question 23

For the 2nd test, what case does a good example of the multiple approach come from?

Answer 23

Ready Mix Concrete v Minister of Pensions (1968)

Question 24

3rd test for vicarious liability.

Answer 24

The tort occurred during the course of his employment

Question 25

For the 3rd test, what are the 3 situations in which vicarious liability applies and if one is met the test is met?

Answer 25

1. An authorised act (explicit or implied)
2. an authorised act carried out in an unauthorised way
3. An act that, while it is not part of an employee’s job, it is closely connected to it, so it is fair and just to make the employer liable

Question 26

Give examples of authorised acts (implied or explicit)?

Answer 26

A bus driver driving his bus
A teacher teaching
A builder building

Question 27

Case for an authorised act (implied or explicit).

Answer 27

Beard v London General Omnibus (1900)

Question 28

Facts of Beard v London General Omnibus (1900).

Answer 28

Conductor took it upon himself to turn the bus around and injured someone.
No liability.

Question 29

Case for an authorised act carried out in an unauthorised way.

Answer 29

Limpus v London General Omnibus (1863)

Question 30

Facts of Limpus v London General Omnibus (1863).

Answer 30

Bus company (D) expressly had told drivers not to race or obstruct other companies’ buses.
Employer deliberately obstructed another bus leading to an accident.

Question 31

Why did vicarious liability apply in Limpus?

Answer 31

Employee was acting for employer’s business even though he was using a forbidden method

Question 32

Case for an act closely connected to the employment.

Answer 32

Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd (2001)

Question 33

Facts of Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd (2001).

Answer 33

A warden at a children’s home sexually abused children.

Question 34

Why did the HoL say vicarious liability applied in Lister?

Answer 34

His actions were “so closely connected” to his work.