Vicarious liability Flashcards
(15 cards)
What is vicarious liability
Refers to when someone has given liability for another act or omission in a workplace setting.
Lord Phillips reiterated that the employer, by employing the employee to carry out the activity will have created the risk of the tort committed by employee
3 stages to establish liability in Vicarious liability
- Was a tort committed
- Was the tortfeasor an employee
- Was employee acting in course of employment when tort was committed - Rose v Plenty
Test for employment in Cox v Ministry of Justice
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. Commission of the wrongful act is a risk created by the D by assigning activities to the individual in question
What tests did the Christian brothers case establish - Akin to employment
Control test - Whether the employer has full control over the employee
Integration test - whether the tortfeasor is fully integrated through the business
Acting in the course of employment
Employers only liable for authorised acts, authorised acts done in a negligent way and international torts
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
2 stages of close connection test
Mohammed v Wm Morrisons supermarket
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 - Poland v parr and sons
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
What is the multiple test
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
Morrison Supermarkets v Various Claimants (2020)
The court found that he was not acting for the benefit of Morrisons, but rather for his own reasons
Barclays v Various Claimants (2020)
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.
Poland v parr and sons
Employer was vicariously liable, because the employee had acted in what he believed was the protection of the employer’s property
Salmond test
This test focuses on whether the employee’s wrongful act was:
Authorised by the employer - Century Insurance v Northern Ireland Road Transport Board.
Or an unauthorized mode of performing an authorized act
Century Insurance v Northern Ireland Road Transport Board.
Employee did an authorised act, but was done negligently so the employer was held vicariously liable.
Joel v Morrison
Employer only liable for acts in the course of their employment; If the employee acts on a “frolic of their own,” the employer is not liable
Mohammed v Wm Morrisons supermarket
Close connection test
Rose v Plenty
Employer held vicariously liable for actions of employee when they were acting within course of employment
