VICARIOUS LIABILITY
What is it:
- A rule of responsibility which renders the defendant liable for the torts
committed by another
- A rule of convenience:
o Claimant has the choice to sue X (the tortfeasor) or Y (his employer)
Usually the employer has the bigger pockets so it is convenient
o NB: HL confirmed that the employer may seek to recover damages from
the employee who committed the tort b/c:
VL treated as joint liability – Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978
*If V releases X from liability, all her rights to sue Y for
damages will usually also be distinguished
Breach of an implied term in the contract of employment to use
reasonable care and skill – Lister v Romford Ice and Cold Storage
Co
Establishing Vicarious Liability:
- Claimant must show three things:
1. Employee committed a tort;
2. The existence of an employer/employee relationship; and
3. The employee acted in the course of his or her employment when
committing the tort in question
- Types of situations:
1. Employment
2. Relationship akin to employment
Various C v Catholic Child Welfare Society (2013)
3. Police
Chief of police (A) in charge of area in which police officer (B) is
working
A will be VL for tort committed by B in performing police officer
duties
4. Agency
A appoints B to act as his agent and B commits a tort while acting
within this scope of authority as A’s agent – A will be VL
5. Car owners
A requests B to perform task for him which requires B to drive A’s
car
B negligently crashes and injures C – A will be VL
6. Partnership
Partners acting “in ordinary course of business of the firm” are VL
7. Joint Venture
A and B embark on joint venture, B commits a tort in process and
A will be VL
Commission of the Tort:
- If the employee is not liable in tort, then it is pointless suing the employer for
VL.
- Must establish all the usual criteria for a tort (duty, standard, causation,
remoteness)
Existence of Employer/Employee Relationship:
- Courts distinguish b/w:
What is it:
- A rule of responsibility which renders the defendant liable for the torts
committed by another
- A rule of convenience:
o Claimant has the choice to sue X (the tortfeasor) or Y (his employer)
Usually the employer has the bigger pockets so it is convenient
o NB: HL confirmed that the employer may seek to recover damages from
the employee who committed the tort b/c:
VL treated as joint liability – Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978
*If V releases X from liability, all her rights to sue Y for
damages will usually also be distinguished
Breach of an implied term in the contract of employment to use
reasonable care and skill – Lister v Romford Ice and Cold Storage
Co
Establishing Vicarious Liability:
- Claimant must show three things:
1. Employee committed a tort;
2. The existence of an employer/employee relationship; and
3. The employee acted in the course of his or her employment when
committing the tort in question
- Types of situations:
1. Employment
2. Relationship akin to employment
Various C v Catholic Child Welfare Society (2013)
3. Police
Chief of police (A) in charge of area in which police officer (B) is
working
A will be VL for tort committed by B in performing police officer
duties
4. Agency
A appoints B to act as his agent and B commits a tort while acting
within this scope of authority as A’s agent – A will be VL
5. Car owners
A requests B to perform task for him which requires B to drive A’s
car
B negligently crashes and injures C – A will be VL
6. Partnership
Partners acting “in ordinary course of business of the firm” are VL
7. Joint Venture
A and B embark on joint venture, B commits a tort in process and
A will be VL
Commission of the Tort:
- If the employee is not liable in tort, then it is pointless suing the employer for
VL.
- Must establish all the usual criteria for a tort (duty, standard, causation,
remoteness)
Existence of Employer/Employee Relationship:
- Courts distinguish b/w:
