Vicarious Liability

Question 1

Define

Answer 1

When a person or organisation is legally responsible for a tort they did not commit due to their relationship with the tortfeasor.

Question 2

what is the main type of relationship where VL applies

Answer 2

Employee/Employer

Question 3

Two stages

Answer 3

1. The tortfeasor was employed by D
2. There is a close connection between the relationship with D and the wrongdoing.

Question 4

Stage 1

Answer 4

Is the relationship (akin) to employer and employee?
The Economic Reality Test (Ready mixed concrete):
A) The workers must agree to provide regular work in return for regular pay
B) The worker accepts that he will be under the control of the company
C) All other contract terms are consistent with the worker being regarded as an employee
E.G. Job description, Training, Uniform, Payment of Tax, Ownership of tools
If one employer lends an employee to another:
Mersey Docks and Harbour board v Coggins and Griffiths: Harbour board still responsible as they continue to pay the driver and had the power to sack him
Hawley v Luminar Leisure: New employer was liable as they exercised a lot of control on how the tortfeasor carried out his work.
Non traditional employees:
Barclays Bank v VC - T was an independent contractor
Cox v MOJ - Akin to employment can be decided where
1. The tortfeasors actions are integrated into D’s business rather than for the benefit of someone else
2. Risk of harm was created by D giving the T those activities.

Question 5

Stage 2

Answer 5

Close connection
Either Authorised by the employer or unauthorised but still closely connected to the authorised work
Morrisons v VC- Def of Close connection. Was T acting for personal reasons or for a reason connected to D’s business?
Intentional wrongdoings:
Mohamud v Morrisons Supermarket- part of T’s job to interract with customers, Crime took place at work and the argument was linked to the business.
N v CC of Merseyside - T was acting for personal reasons , not fair to say his actions were done in the ordinary course of employment
Unintentional wrongdoings:
Twine v Beans - Driver was on a frolic of his own
Rose v Plenty - wrongdoing occurred when the driver was still carrying out his work and the employer benefited from the work

Question 6

Defences for the defendant

Answer 6

Civil Liability (Contribution Act) 1978
Allows the employers to reclaim damages they have paid out to the claimant from the tortfeasor
However not often used