Tort - Vicarious Liability Flashcards
Reasons for vicarious liability
Employer in better position to compensate victim
Compulsory insurance
Employer exercises control over employees
Employer obtains benefit, should take burden
Encourages better training, supervision and control of employees
Elements of Vicarious liability
Tort committed by another
Employment relationship
In course of employment
Control test
Yewens v Noakes
Organisation test
Stevenson v MacDonald
Economic reality test
Ready Mixed Concrete - remuneration, control, provisions of contract
Warner Holidays
control, provision of tools, salary, tax, sick pay, control over hours, right to do other work (Argent), mutuality of obligations (O’Kelly)
Massey
Description of relationship is evidential, not conclusive
Generally employer remains liable for employee lent to another
Mersey Docks
Possible for both employers to be vicariously liable for the same employee if both entitled and obliged to control the employee’s actions
Viasystems
Course of Employment
Winfield:
- expressly or impliedly authorised
- unauthorised manner of doing something authorised
- necessarily incidental to work employee is employed to do
bus driver racing = in course of employment
Limpus v London General Omnibus
train porter pulled passenger off train = in course of employment
Bayley v Manchester Railway
Frolic of his own
Joel v Morrison
bus conductor drove bus - frolic
Beard v London General Omnibus
Bouncer hit plaintiff twice - once inside club (vicariously liable) and once outside club (not vicariously liable)
Daniel v Whetstone
conductor hit passenger - frolic
Keppel Bus v Saab Bin Ahmed
express prohibition of hitch-hiker - frolic
Twine v Bean
express prohibition of giving lifts - frolic
Conway v George Wimpey
express prohibition of driving others - not a frolic as done for benefit of business
Rose v Plenty
Detour to visit relative = frolic
Storey v Ashton
In office hours, paid travel expenses - in course of employment
Smith v Stages
presumption that criminal activity is outside the course of employment (rebuttable)
Warren v Henley
PO not liable for postman writing race hate on letters
Irving v Post Office
Tort was the culminating event of an incident which started in the course of employment
Mattis v Pollock
Look at relative closeness of connection between the tort and the nature of employment
Lister v Hesley Hall
Church not vicariously liable as no connection between tort and employment
MAGA v Birmingham Archdiocese
Independent Contracts generally responsible for their own actions
Rowe v Herman
Vicarious liability where defendant authorises torts of a contractor
Ellis v Sheffield Gas
Vicarious liability where defendant is negligent in hiring contractor/giving instructions etc
Pinn v Rew
