what are the 3 main rules for VL
- there must be a tort
- the tortfeasor must be an employee
- torn must occur during course. of employment AND/OR tort must be closley connected to employement
1) example of tort?
negligent driving
2) ways to establish employee status from Barclays bank v various?
- relationship between two people which makes it proper for the law to make one pay for the fault of the other
- connection between the relationship and the tortfeasor’s wrongdoing
2) what are the 3 traditional tests used to establish employee status?
- control test
- integration test
- economic reality (multiple) test
2) what is the control test with a case?
if they are an employee they have been told what to do and how to do it
Mersey docks v Coggins
2) what is the integration test with a case?
the more closely a worker is involved with the core business of the employer, the more likely he is to be an employee.
Stevenson v MacDonald
2) what is the economic reality (multiple) test with a case?
different factors are weighed up to see if the tortfeasor is an employee of a contractor
Ready mixed concrete v minister of pensions
2) what are factors that the court could look at?
- whether they provide work in return of a wage
- do they pay income tax and national insurance as a employee or as self-employed
- whether the worker can delegate his work without permission
2) if ambiguous the traditional tests may not work, so what test is used instead and a case?
the akin to employment test
Armes v Nottingham CC
2) how many aspects of the akin to employment test are there?
5
2) part one of the akin to employment test?
the employer is likely to have the means to compensate the victim and can be expected to have insured against that liability
2) part two of the akin to employment test?
the act will have been committed as a result of an activity taken by the employee on behalf of the employer
2) part three of the akin to the employment test?
the employee’s activity is likely to be part of the business activity of the employer
2) part four of the akin to the employment test?
the employer by employing the employee to carry out the activity will have created the risk of the act being committed by the employee
2) part five of the akin to the employment test?
the employee will, to a greater or lesser degree, have been under the control of the employer
3) what needs to be established about the tort?
whether it is non-intentional or intentional
3) NIT - how to establish a NIT through the salmond test
an employer will be held liable for either a wrongful act they have authorised, or a wrongful and unauthorised mode of an act that was authorised (authorised act)
3) NIT - case for the salmond test?
Poland v Parr
3) NIT - other 3 ways of establishing a NIT and the cases?
- authorised act in an unauthorised way = Limpus v London General Omnibus
- authorised act in purely careless manner = Century Insurance v Northern Ireland Transport Board
- employer benefits from the tort = Rose v Plenty
3) NIT - what are examples that are not within course of employment with cases?
- unauthorised act in an unauthorised way = Beard v London General Omnibus
- employee on a frolic of his own = Storey v Ashton
- giving unauthorised lifts = Twine v Beans Express
3) IT - what is the close connection test?
The close connection test means that the court must establish a ‘close connection’ between what the employee was employed to do and the employees conduct.
3) IT - case for the close connection test?
Lister v Hesley Hall
3) IT - part one of the close connection test?
what was the field of activities entrusted by the employer to the employee (what was the nature of their job)
3) IT - part two of the close connection test?
was there sufficient connection between the position they were employed to carry out and the wrongful act which makes sense for the employer to be held liable
