Zusammenfassung der Ressource
Vicarious Liability
- Employee
- Individual who
is paid for thier
services
- LIABLE: Mersy Docks v
Coggins & Griffith -
Harbour board liable for
contracted crane drivers
negligence as they paid
him a wage and had
control
- Work specific
hours -
part/full time,
temporary, voluntary
- Self-employed
- LIABLE: Ferguson v John Dawson - C
who was a self employed labourer fell off
roof & injured himself. Employer had
control over C even though he was self
employed (still an employee).
- Someone
who is
controlled by
an employer
- NOT LIABLE: Collins v
Hertfordshire County
Council - employer could
not control how the
surgeon performed his
duties
- Someone
you can
select &
dismiss
- LIABLE: Cassidy v
Ministry of Health -
surgeon was an
employee as
employer could
select & dismiss
- Could work
for one
company and
supervised by
another
- LIABLE: Viasystems v
Thermal transfer - both
companies had control over
employee, liability equally
shared
- Vicarious liability is the liability which
falls on one person (employer) as a
result of another persons actions
(employee).
- Employer vicariously liable if the
tort has been committed by an
employee in course of
emloyment
- Economic Test determines
what is an employee
outlined in Ready Mixed
Concrete v MPNI
- Payment of a wage
- Whether tools for job
are provided by the
employer
- Whether worker
has to obey
orders
- Exercise self control
over the way work is
done
- Course of employment
- Employer liable if
wrongdoing occured in the
course of employment
- LIABLE: Century Insurance v
Northern Ireland Road
Transport - Tank driver
smoked cigarette whilst petrol
was being transferred (caused
explosion). Driver acting in
course of employment
- Authorised acts carried out
in an unauthorised manner
- Employee is doing what they
are meant to do, but they act in
a way not in their job
description
- LIABLE: Vasey - Doormen of
club chased & assaulted C. Club
held vicariously liable.
- LIABLE: Rose v Plenty - Boy infured
whilst milkman took 13yr old boy on
round. Employers liable as he was still
doing the job he was meant to be doing.
- When employee commits a tort whilst
doing a job outside their job
description - EMPLOYER NOT
VICARIOUSLY LIABLE
- NOT LIABLE: Iqbal v London Transport
Executive - Bus conductor drove bus
after being told not to. Employers not
vicariously liable as driving the bus was
something he was not employed to do.
- Includes activities carried
out during normal hourse
of work, as well as
activites closely
connected.
- Extension of the
Workplace (Closely
linked)
- LIABLE: Ruddiman & Co v Smith -
Employee went to wash hands after
end of working day (resulted in
overflow). Employers vicariously
liable as activities were closely
connected
- LIABLE: Station v National Coal
Board - Collecting wages at end of
working day, held within course of
employment
- Liablilty of employees
travelling to/from work
- Most journeys outside course of
employment unless they receive
travel expenses
- LIABLE: Employee injured whilst
travelling home due to other
emoloyee driving negligently
(Received travel expenses)
- Frolics of their own
- Employer not VL for activities
performed by an employee
which has no relevance for the
job they're employed to do
- NOT LIABLE:
Heasmans v Clarity
Cleaning - C
contracted to clean
but made long
distance phone calls
costing £1400.
Unauthorised act =
No liablity
- NOT LIABLE:
Stoney v Ashton -
Wine driver took
detour to collect
cask and ran over C.
Employer not VL as
this was soemething
he was not meant to
be doing.