Vicarious Liability

VL isn’t a Tort itself

But a means of imposing liability for a Tort onto a party other than the tortfeasor.

For the employer to be liable

The tortfeasor must be an employee and the tort must take place during the course of employment.

Were they an employee?

A number of tests have been developed to determine if someone is an employee.

Modern Test - Economic reality/multiple test = Ready Mix Concrete v Min of Pensions.

Court must consider whether agreement to provide skill for wage

Is the tortfeasor subject to control of the employer and is there a contract of employment?

What other factors of the relationship should be considered?

• Ownership of tools

• Plant and equipment

• Method of payment

• Taxes/ NI contributions

• Level of Independence

Cox v MOD - prisoner in kitchen can be an employee

Tort must be conducted in course of employment

Not in course if employee is on a ‘frolic of his own’ - Hilton v Thomas

Not in course if doing something expressly prohibited - Beard v London Omnibus

Tort must be conducted during course of employment

Activities that are in course are:

• acts done that are authorised by the employer .

• Authorised acts done in an unauthorised manner - (Limpus v London omnibus)

• Work in negligent manner - (Centing Insurance v NI transport)

• Giving unauthorised lifts is not within employment - (Twine v Beans Express) unless employer gets benefit - (Rose v Plenty)

• Criminal acts closely connected to employment unlike Barry v BXB.