Law - vicarious liability key terms
Vicarious liability is a form of liability by which the defendant is liable for a tort committed by a third party
The main purpose of VL is to ensure to victim of the tort can receive compensation for the injury or damage suffered
In the workplace the employer will usually be in a better financial position to pay than one of their employees
The claimant can sue the employee who is still jointly liable with the employer for their actions, but the employer is more likely to have the means to pay for the damages
Employer is entitled to recover any compensation paid to C from the employee, e.g through wage deduction
Two stage test to see if one person can be made liable for a tort committed by another:
The relationship between D and the tortfeasor must be of employment or “akin to” (relationship of “employment”)
There must be a close connection between the wrongful conduct and acts the tortfeasor was allowed to do so it can be fairly and properly be regarded as done by the tortfeasor in course of employment (close connection test”)
Stage one
Employee relationship
An employer is only liable for torts by employees
If the person is injured because of the negligence of an independent contractor, they must sue the independent contractor
Control test
One feature of an employment relationship is the ability to control the way a job is done. An employee is told what to do and how to do it, an independent contractor is only told what to do
Integration test
A worker will be an employee if his work is fully integrated into the business, if a person’s work is only an accessory to the business, then they are not an employee
Economic reality test
The court said 3 factors must exist before a worker can be classified as an employee:
The employee agrees to provide work or skill in return for a wage
The employee accepts that the work will be subject to the control of the employer
All other considerations in the contract are consistent with there being a contract of employment, rather than any other relationship
“Akin to employment” test for non-traditional employment relationships
Courts have more recently held that people can be vicariously liable for someone who is not technically their employee, provided that the relationship between them is sufficiently akin to employment
Stage two
The wrongful act must be so closely connected with the acts that the tortfeasor was allowed to do so it can be fairly and properly be regarded as done by the tortfeasor while acting in the course of employment or quasi-employment
Employee acting negligently
If an employee does their job negligently, the employer can be vicariously liable
Acting against orders
If an employee is doing their job, but acts against orders in the way they do it, the employer can still be liable if those actions further the employees business
Employee acting on a “frolic” of their own
If employee causes injury or damage to another while doing something which has nothing to do with their employment, or at a time or place outside of work, an employer will usually not be liable
Criminal actions of an employee
Offences against a person (e.g battery) are also considered torts of trespass to the person so an employer a can be liable for the crimes of an employee provided there is a close connection between the crime and acts the employee was authorised to do.
Vicarious liability is a form of liability by which the defendant is liable for a tort committed by a third party
The main purpose of VL is to ensure to victim of the tort can receive compensation for the injury or damage suffered
In the workplace the employer will usually be in a better financial position to pay than one of their employees
The claimant can sue the employee who is still jointly liable with the employer for their actions, but the employer is more likely to have the means to pay for the damages
Employer is entitled to recover any compensation paid to C from the employee, e.g through wage deduction
Two stage test to see if one person can be made liable for a tort committed by another:
The relationship between D and the tortfeasor must be of employment or “akin to” (relationship of “employment”)
There must be a close connection between the wrongful conduct and acts the tortfeasor was allowed to do so it can be fairly and properly be regarded as done by the tortfeasor in course of employment (close connection test”)
Stage one
Employee relationship
An employer is only liable for torts by employees
If the person is injured because of the negligence of an independent contractor, they must sue the independent contractor
Control test
One feature of an employment relationship is the ability to control the way a job is done. An employee is told what to do and how to do it, an independent contractor is only told what to do
Integration test
A worker will be an employee if his work is fully integrated into the business, if a person’s work is only an accessory to the business, then they are not an employee
Economic reality test
The court said 3 factors must exist before a worker can be classified as an employee:
The employee agrees to provide work or skill in return for a wage
The employee accepts that the work will be subject to the control of the employer
All other considerations in the contract are consistent with there being a contract of employment, rather than any other relationship
“Akin to employment” test for non-traditional employment relationships
Courts have more recently held that people can be vicariously liable for someone who is not technically their employee, provided that the relationship between them is sufficiently akin to employment
Stage two
The wrongful act must be so closely connected with the acts that the tortfeasor was allowed to do so it can be fairly and properly be regarded as done by the tortfeasor while acting in the course of employment or quasi-employment
Employee acting negligently
If an employee does their job negligently, the employer can be vicariously liable
Acting against orders
If an employee is doing their job, but acts against orders in the way they do it, the employer can still be liable if those actions further the employees business
Employee acting on a “frolic” of their own
If employee causes injury or damage to another while doing something which has nothing to do with their employment, or at a time or place outside of work, an employer will usually not be liable
Criminal actions of an employee
Offences against a person (e.g battery) are also considered torts of trespass to the person so an employer a can be liable for the crimes of an employee provided there is a close connection between the crime and acts the employee was authorised to do.
