Vicarious Liability

Question 1

What is it?

Answer 1

When one person is held liable for the actions of another. Most likely to be employer-employee relationship. This then makes them jointly and severely liable. Potentially get this back through Right of Relief (Lister) Employer bears strict liability for employee’s fault even if blameless (Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas NHS Trust)

Question 2

Underlaying Principles

Answer 2

Qui facit per aluim facit per se (He who acts through another is deemed responsible) 
Respondeat superior (Let the master be responsible)

Question 3

There must be:

Answer 3

Employer-Employee Relationship
Employee at fault
Employee acting within scope of employment

Question 4

Challenge in identifying employee

Answer 4

Mere label of saying employee does not mean so, Massey v Crown Life Insurance. Yet label may help if it is ambiguous
Control Test (Traditional) Yewens v Noakes - Under control of master as to how they will do their work. Yet complicated jobs, employer not always sure
Integration Test - Employed if employment is integral part of business, yet contract of services merely accessory. Stevenson Jordan & Harrison Ltd v McDonald & Evans
Multiple Test - Ready-Mix Concrete Ltd v MPNI -
1) Servant agrees to work for wage, and provides own work and skill for master
2) Subject to control by the master
3) Other provisions of the contract as that which create a contract of employment
Employment Rights Act 1996, s230(3) defines workers
Pimlico Plumbers Ltd v Smith - Distinction between employed under contract of services, self employed, and those self employed carrying out for someone else

Question 5

Hiring from agencies

Answer 5

Uncertainty, Toms v Royal Mail Group plc - Used Multiple test, definitely control but mutual obligations less certain

Question 6

Scope of Employment

Answer 6

Kirby Test -

1) Master authorise act - Master Liable
2) Servant carries out act authorised in a way that Master would not authorise - Master Liable
3) Does something outside scope of employment - Servant liable
4) Uses master’s time to do something for themselves - Servant liable (Kirby)

Scenario 3 hardly used, as Rose v Plenty (Milkman uses boys to deliver milk, one injured) If done for employment even if prohibited. Williams v A & A Hemphill Ltd - Long detour, as started for employer though still course of employment

Lister Test - Input to prevent unjust outcomes via House of Lords. Lister - sexually abused children, is it closely connected to employment that it would be fair to hold employer liable