Vicarious Liability Flashcards
Yewens v noakes
English tax case
A servant is a person is A person subject to the command of his master as to the manner in which he shall work
Control test
Short V jw Henderson
Identified key features: power to select the servant right to control the method of working and right to suspend wages
Control test
Stevenson Jordan and Harrison V McDonald and Evans
A worker will be in employee if his work is fully integrated into the business this establishes the integration test
Hawley v luminaire leisure
A bouncer assaulted a customer outside of the defendants club
As the club exercised so much control over the banter he was liable
Control test
Ready mixed concrete V minister of pensions
Payment of national insurance contributors
The employee agrees to provide work in return for a wage then the employee accepts the work and then the employee is contracted and the employer Sets their wage and hours
Economic reality test
MCE v Delasalle brothers
C physically abused by one of the brothers while he attended their school
No basis upon which the allegation of vicarious liability could succeed
E v English provenance of our Lady of charity
Claimant claimed she had been sexually abused by a nun in charge of a children’s home
The relationship akin to employment and established by a connection between the defendant and an actor and is it fair and just to impose liability on the defendant
Proximate enough
Catholic child welfare society v various claimants
Abuse claims arose from school
Inc Association a second party can be liable and it can be extended the sexual assault
Itcoe
Cox V Ministry of Justice
Claimant employed in a prison and a prisoner dropped a bag of rice on her back
It focuses on whether someone is employed
Itcoe
Mohammed v Morrison’s supermarket
Morrison’s were held responsible when their employee carried out a criminal action
Although the gross breach of position the employer was responsible
Close connection test
Barclays bank versus various claimants
Hired a Doctor Who abuse people
Their relationship was close enough and it was a close connection
Independent contractors
Limpus v London general
They drop his omnibus on the path of another
Injury resulted from Masters purposes
Acting against orders
Nitcoe
Rose V plenty
Young boy died help in a milkman
He was conducting business
Acting against orders
Nitcoe
Twine v beans express
Driver give lifts when he had a contract with the post office
Lift prohibited but also limiting factor
Nitcoe
Acting against orders
Beard v London omnibus
Drove outside his route and injured a man
Sidestreet were not on the usual route
Nitcoe
