vicarious liability Flashcards
what is vicarious liability?
VL is when a person or organisation is legally responsible for a tort they did not commit due to their relationship with the tortfeasor
who is classed as a tortfeasor?
the person who actually commits the tort (the employee)
who is classed as a defendant?
the person legally responsible for the tortfeasors actions (the employer)
when does VL apply?
in a employer employee relationship, or one similar
what is stage 1 and 2 in the ‘2 stage test’?
-1. the tortfeasor was employed by the defendant
-2. there is a close connection between the relationship with d and t
what case set out what the multiple/economic reality test?
Ready Mixed Concrete v Min of Pensions
what is the multiple/economic reality test?
-the worker must agree to provide work in return for a regular wage
-the worker accepts that he will be under the control of the company
-all other contract terms are consistent with the worker being regarded as an employee
what case shows what happens if an employer lends his employee to another company?
Mersey Docks and Harbour Board v Coggins and Griffiths Ltd
what happens when an employer lends his employee to another company?
there is a presumption that the permanent employer will remain vicariously liable, unless the temporary employer exercised a lot of control - Hawley
what is the 2 part test seen in Cox v Ministry of Justice?
-1. the harm was wrongfully done by an individual who carries out activities as an integral part of d’s business and does another business benefit from this work don
-2. the risk of harm was created by the defendant giving the individual the activities
what things are set out in Barclays Bank v Various?
-court must look at all details of the relationship
-if it isn’t clear whether they are an independent contractor or not, the test from Cox will be used
what are the 2 ways to prove close connection?
- where the wrongful act was authorised by the employer
- where the wrongful act was unauthorised but still closely connected to the authorised work
what is the main case used for close connections?
Morrisons v Various
what does Morrisons v Various say?
-look at what t was authorised to do and what they actually did
-did it have a close enough connection to be considered during the ordinary course of employment
-was it connected to the job
what does Mohamud say?
-1. whether the intentional act took place on work premises
-2. whether the intentional act was in work hours
-3. whether the intentional act was part of what t was employed to do or for personal reasons
however what case shows when it is for personal reasons outside of job?
N v Chief Constable for Merseyside
what case shows when the wrongful act was not accidental?
Rose v Plenty
what does The Civil Liability Act 1978
if the c sues d, d can sue t to claim the money back
