Vicarious Liability Evaluation

Question 1

Employer more financially stable

Answer 1

Public Policy Test Employer pays if insured or can afford

Question 2

Can be liable for authorised acts

Answer 2

Limpus v General Omnibus Company Against orders but doing job Good for Claimant: Ensures compensation Unfair on Defendant: Forbid the act

Question 3

Claimant shouldnt suffer from employers mistraining

Answer 3

Catholic Brothers Case Employee liable as theyre in control and acknowledged risk when hiring Good for Claimant: Compensated for damages due to risk O created Bad for Defendant: Cant control behaviour at all times

Question 4

Close connection test allows justice

Answer 4

Lister v Hesley Hall Acts closely related to work puts employer at fault Good for Claimant: Compensated even if act not part of duties Bad for Defendant: Cant predict employees actions

Question 5

Not liable for frolic

Answer 5

Hilton v Thomas Burton Not liable if employee acts outside their job Good for Defendant: Would be unreasonable to expect 24/7 monitoring Bad for Claimant: Left without compensation even if injury from Ds equipment

Question 6

Multiple tests help prevent unfair liability

Answer 6

Control

Question 7

Not liable for criminal acts

Answer 7

Warren v Henleys Not liable for criminal acts of employees Good for Defendant: Can't control employees personal decisions

Question 8

Not liable if not during course of employment

Answer 8

Beard v London General Omnibus Acted against orders