Vicarious liability

Question 1

What is vicarious liability

Answer 1

Refers to when someone has given liability for another act or omission in a workplace setting

Question 2

3 stages to establish liability in Vicarious liability

Answer 2

1. Was a tort committed
2. Was the tortfeasor an employee
3. Was employee acting in course of employment when tort was committed

Question 3

Test for employment in Cox v Ministry of Justice

Answer 3

Traditionally only liable for employees but Cox states ‘a relationship other than one of employment is in principle capable of giving rise to a vicarious liability where…’
1. Harm is wrongfully done by individual
2. Carries out activities as an integral part of the business for the D and its benefit
3. Where the commission of the wrongful act is a risk created by the defendant by assigning those activities to the individual in question

Question 4

What tests did the Christian brothers case establish - Akin to employment

Answer 4

Control test - Whether the employer has full control over the employee
Integration test - whether the tortfeasor is fully integrated through the business

Question 5

Acting in the course of employment

Answer 5

Employers only liable for authorised acts, authorised acts done in a negligent way and international torts(criminal acts closely connected to employment)
If there is any doubt about if they were acting in the course of employment courts use the close connection test
If the D is considered to be acting outside the course of employment they are described as being a ‘frolic of their own’ - joel v morrison

Question 6

2 stages of close connection test

Answer 6

1. What function or field of activities have been entrusted to employee
2. Was there sufficient connection between the position in which the employee was employed and the wrongful conduct
   If test isn’t met and it became a personal motive means they were acting further than the employers business - Morrison supermarkets v various claimants

Question 7

What is the multiple test

Answer 7

The multiple test involves the court considering all the facts of a case before deciding whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor - Barclays v Various claims

Question 8

Morrison Supermarkets v Various Claimants (2020)

Answer 8

The court held that Mr. Skelton’s actions were not sufficiently connected to his employment to be considered part of the ordinary course of his duties. The court also found that Mr. Skelton was not acting for the benefit of Morrisons, but rather for his own reasons

Question 9

Barclays v Various Claimants (2020)

Answer 9

Not an employee but was an independent contractor and therefore there was not a relationship akin to employment, confirming that there is an independent contractor defence in vicarious liability which can be effective in deciding employment status.