Unit 8 Flashcards
Vicarious liability is a form of primary liability?
False- primary liability lies with the employee and the employer’s liability is secondary.
- Which of the following is not a justification for vicarious liability?
The employer is taken to have been negligent- this is not a justification for vicarious liability. The employer may have been negligent but the primary concern is the negligence of the employee.
Which test used to determine whether there is an employment relationship is most likely to be of assistance in the 21st century?
The ‘economic reality’ test
Viasystems v Thermal Transfer is an important 2005 case on vicarious liability. Why is it so significant?
Because the court decided that dual vicarious liability is legally possible.
In Morgans v Launchbury the defendant was not held vicariously liable as a principal.
True- the House of Lords held that mere permission to drive the car was not enough to impose vicarious liability.
Which one of the factors below is not required in order to establish vicarious liability?
A proven negligence action against the employee- this is not required in order to establish vicarious liability.
In which of the following cases was the employee held to be acting within the course of employment?
Harvey v RG O’Dell Ltd correct
What was the legally significant distinction between Rose v Plenty and Twine v Bean’s Express?
The fact that the unauthorised passenger in Rose was assisting the employee in furthering the employer’s business.
Which of the statements below is not true regarding Lister v Hesley Hall?
The Salmond test was applied to the question of course of employment.
Criminal conduct is never held to be in the course of employment for the purposes of vicarious liability.
False- criminal activity may still be held to be within the course of employment – see for example Morris v CW Martin and Sons and Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets (2016)
Ali is employed as a doorman at the Happy Hour club, owned by Vicky King. One night he is taunted by Damien, who is leaving the club in a drunk and aggressive state. Ali went back into the club, grabbed a bottle and ran down the street chasing Damien and finally hit him on the head. Damien has a fractured skull. What advice would you give Vicky on the likelihood of her being held to be vicariously liable for Ali’s tort?
According to Mattis v Pollock Ali will be held to be acting within the course of employment, and Vicky would then be vicariously liable.
The employee in Majrowski Guy’s and Thomas’s NHS Trust was alleged to have committed which tort?
The employee in Majrowski Guy’s and Thomas’s NHS Trust was alleged to have committed which tort?
