Vicarious Liabity

Question 1

what is vicarious liability?

Answer 1

where a third person has legal responsibility for the unlawful actions of another. commonly seen in the workplace.

Question 2

why is this rule usually criticised?

Answer 2

it applies liability unfairly as an apparently innocent party is liable for someone else’s actions.
employer has not been directly at fault, making this an example of strict (or no fault) liabilty.

Question 3

how is liability justified?

Answer 3

• employer may have control over activities of workers in workplace, instructions of employer may have led to tort
• employers responsible for hiring and firing, disciplining staff. may have been careless in employing
• employer is responsible for ensuring all employees are trained so work is done safely.
• employer is in a better financial position than employee to pay compensation to V, employer is required to take out public liability insurance for injuries in workplace.

Question 4

what are the 2 main tests required to prove vicarious liability?

Answer 4

• was person alleged to have committed the tort an employee? generally, no liability for independent contractor as they are legally responsible for their actions.
• Did employee commit alleged tort ‘during the course of his employment’?

Question 5

what is the control test in testing employment status?

Answer 5

older test, tests whether employer controls what the employee does and the way in which its done.

Question 6

what is the integration or organisation test in testing employment status?

Answer 6

(Stevenson Jordan v McDonalds) established this, provides that a worker will be an ‘employee’ if his work is fully integrated into the business, if only an accessory, then not employee
problems- examiners by this test are not employees however, they pay tax and pension

Question 7

what is the economic reality or multiple test in testing employment status?

Answer 7

established in Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions,
indicates employment or self
–employment: ownership of tools/ method of payment / tax
deducted/job description/ job independence

Question 8

can more than one employer be vicariously liable?

Answer 8

Viasystems v Thermal Transfer
dual vicarious liability out of negligence of a single employee, responsibility of each employer must be equal, should contribute 50% to claimant.

Question 9

acting in the course of employment

Answer 9

Courts have to decide whether an act is carried out in the course of employment.

Question 10

acting in the course of employment: ACTING AGAINST ORDERS:

Answer 10

Employee acting against orders – Employer liable (Limpus v London General, racing bus)

Rose v Plenty, kids helping milkman, dairy was benefiting from work done by boy so liable

Unauthorised lifts – employer not liable (no benefit gained) (Twine V Beans Express)

Question 11

acting in the course of employment: ACTING OUTSIDE EMPLOYMENT

Answer 11

Causes injury outside of what employed to do - no liability (Beard v London Co)

Question 12

acting in the course of employment: EMPLOYEE COMMITTING CRIMINAL ACT

Answer 12

During work then employer liable to victim of the crime (Lister v Hesley Hall)

must be a Close connection between D’s employment and criminal act (N v Chief constable Merseyside Police), (Mohamud v Morrison’s Supermarkets, employee within field of employment, at work, in working hours, employer liable)

Question 13

acting in the course of employment: EMPLOYEE COMMITTING A NEGLIGENT ACT

Answer 13

Employee doing job bad; employer liable (Century Insurance v Ireland Road Transport Board

Question 14

acting in the course of employment: EMPLOYEE ACTING ON A ‘FROLIC’ OF HIS/HER OWN

Answer 14

Injury/ damage caused at another area or time outside of work; employer not liable
(Hilton v Thomas Burton Ltd)

Question 15

REMEDIES/ DAMAGES:

Answer 15

 One payment

 Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978, employer can recover any compensation paid from employee (wage deduction)