Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

tort > vicarious liability > Flashcards

vicarious liability Flashcards

1
Q

main purpose of VL

A

ensure V receives compensation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

what is VL

A

where one person is liable for a tort committed by another

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

what is it a form of

A

strict liability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

first part of the 2 stage test

A

relationship between the D and C is one of employment or akin to employment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

second part to the 2 stage test

A

close connection between the wrongful conduct and acts C was authorised to do

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

2 differences to consider between employee and IC

A
  1. employee= contract of employment IC= self-employed
  2. E= contract of service IC= contract for service
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

case for IC

A

Barclays Bank v various C

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Barclays Bank v various C facts

A

VL does not apply to IC

doctor carrying out medical assessments for BB was an IC as he had a portfolio of clients, and free to refuse BB requests

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

3 tests for employee status

A

control
integration
economic reality

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

control test

A

ability to control the way a job is done
employee told what to do and how
IC only told what to do

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

case for control test

A

Mersey docks v Coggins

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Mersey docks v Coggins facts

A

driver of crane was employee as the board had the power to tell him the way in which his work is carried, paid him, could sack him

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

integration test

A

worker is an employee if his work is fully integrated into the business

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

if a person’s work is only an accessory to the business are they an employee

A

no

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

case for integration test

A

Stevenson v Macdonald

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

economic reality test case

A

ready mixed concrete v minister if pensions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

ready mixed concrete v minister if pensions facts

A

lorry drivers

  • wore a uniform
  • followed instructions
  • IC as they owned their lorries responsible for repairs
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

ready mixed concrete 3 factors decided need to exist

A
  1. employee provides work in return for wage
  2. employee subject to control of employer
  3. other considerations in contract are consistent w there being a contract of employment
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

can more than one employer be VL and case

A

yes, Viasystems v Thermal

20
Q

akin to employment test for non traditional employment relationships

A

VL if relationship is sufficiently akin to employment by considering the details of the relationship

21
Q

case for akin to employment

A

catholic child welfare v various claimants

22
Q

catholic child welfare v various claimants facts

A

abused by teachers at school who were members of a religious org

23
Q

catholic child welfare v various claimants SC held

A

not a formal contract but institutes relationship w its members was sufficiently akin to one of employment

based on hierarchical structure, direct what was taught, importance, bound by rules

also sufficiently close connection as abuse was carried out whilst providing an education

24
Q

Barry Jehovahs witnesses v BXB issue

A

whether relationship between the org and church elder was akin to employment

25
Q

Barry Jehovahs witnesses v BXB decisions

A

as an elder he was carrying out work on behalf of them, furthered their aims, appointment process and hierarchical structure

26
Q

close connection test

A

wrongful act must be so closely connected w acts that they were authorised to do that it can be regarded as acting in the course of employment

sufficiently close connection

27
Q

employee acting negligently

A

if an employee does their job badly employer can be liable for their actions which cause damage

28
Q

employee acting negligently case

A

Century insurance v northern island

29
Q

Century insurance v northern island facts

A

employer VL for explosion that resulted as driver carried out the task he was employed to do even in a negligent way

30
Q

acting against orders

A

if an employee is doing their job but acts against orders and employer can still be VL if actions further business

31
Q

acting against orders case

A

limpus v London general omnibus

32
Q

limpus v London general omnibus facts

A

instructed not to race, they did and caused an accident

VL as driver was acting for the employers business, the fact that it was in a forbidden way was irrelevant

33
Q

case for when acting in the course of employment in a negligent way but it furthers the business

A

Rose v plenty

employer benefitted from work undertaken by the boy

34
Q

employee acting on a frolic of their own

A

causes injury to another while doing something nothing to do w their employment or at time or place outside work, not VL

35
Q

case employee acting on frolic of their own

A

Hilton v Thomas Burton

36
Q

Hilton v Thomas Burton facts

A

workers took an authorised break
employer not liable for the negligent driving since they were on a frolic of their own

37
Q

is travelling to and from work in the course of employment

A

no but travelling between workplaces the employer may be VL

38
Q

case for travelling between work

A

Smith v stages

39
Q

Smith v stages facts

A

driving back to work
VL as he was acting in house of employment as he was being paid during this travelling time

40
Q

criminal actions of an employee

A

trespass to the person, employer may e liable if there is a close connection between the crime and the acts the employee is authorised to do

41
Q

case for criminal actions

A

lister v hesley hall

42
Q

lister v hesley hall facts

A

employer Vl for abuse as the acts were closely connected w his employment so it was fair and just

43
Q

what did the SC decide about when the CC test will not be satisfied

A

won’t be satisfied just bc it provides D an opportunity to commit a wrongful conduct

44
Q

case for CC not satisfied just bc it provides opportunity

A

Barry congregation v BXB

45
Q

Barry congregation v BXB facts (CC)

A

he abused his friendship rather than any church responsibility so not VL

tort (7 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions