The most common justifications which attempt to explain the rationale behind vicarious liability include the doctrine of ‘ deep pockets ’, which states that the employer is in a better financial situation to incur the loss than the employee, and the concept of enterprise liability, which is based on the recognition that carrying out a business enterprise involves certain risks; given that businesses accept the risks it takes with the hope of gaining profit, it is only just for the enterprise to also burden any losses incurred by those risks.
Full Answer
What is the law of vicarious liability?
The law of vicarious liability is indeed one which is unique within the justice system. It is the only tort that looks beyond the primary tortfeasor’s liability and applies liability to an otherwise innocent party, the defendant tortfeasor in secondary liability.
Which legislation has a prima facie imposition of vicarious liability?
A legislation that has a prima facie imposition of vicarious liability is the Partnership Act which governs the activities of law firms in the course of their business. Furthermore, the case of Lister v Ice & Cold Storage Company, allows for an employer to sue for indemnity against an employee.
Who is the pioneer of vicarious liability?
Holt CJ is an established pioneer in the area of vicarious liability, declared in Herne v Nicholl (1700) that ‘For seeing somebody must be a loser, it is more reason, that he that employs and puts a trust and confidence…should be a loser rather than a stranger’.
How is vicarious liability said to help achieve social convenience?
Vicarious liability is said to help achieve social convenience because it helps to protect the rights of victim so that they are entitled to sufficient amount of compensation which they are entitled to receive.
What is the purpose of vicarious liability?
The purpose of vicarious liability is to allow the victim to fairly access the resources that they need when they are hurt in an accident. When the victim gets injured because of the actions of someone else, it's only fair that the people responsible pay for the damages.
What is the rationale behind vicarious liability quizlet?
The term vicarious liability refers to situations where one party is held liable for the torts of another. It arises because of a specific relationship between the parties. In fact, the term 'vicarious' actually means 'on behalf of another'.
What is vicarious liability in law in simple terms?
vicarious liability. n. sometimes called "imputed liability," attachment of responsibility to a person for harm or damages caused by another person in either a negligence lawsuit or criminal prosecution.
What are the three elements of vicarious liability?
The three vicarious liability elements are:The wrongful act must have been committed by an employee or other agent.The employee or other agent must have been acting within the scope of his or her employment or agency.The employer or other person must have had the ability to control the employee or other agent.
Which is a possible result from the concept of vicarious liability quizlet?
Vicarious liability makes a person liable for another's wrongful conduct due to a special relationship between them. Note that this is really liability without fault because the person who's being held liable has done nothing wrong. You might think of this concept as guilt by association.
Which of the following describes vicarious liability?
In layman's terms, vicarious liability is when an employer is liable for one of its employees' wrongs. In other words, vicarious liability is when an employer is responsible for paying for the damages caused by an employee's act even where the employer did not authorize the act or, manifestly, do the act.
Where does vicarious liability generally arise from?
Vicarious liability can arise in situations where one party is supposed to be responsible for (and have control over) a third party and is negligent in carrying out that responsibility and exercising that control.
What are the two elements of vicarious liability?
So the constituents of vicarious liability are: (1) There must be a relationship of a certain kind. (2) The wrongful act must be related to the relationship in a certain way.
What is one possible result from the concept of vicarious liability?
In California, someone who is vicariously liable may be legally responsible for a plaintiff's medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering and other losses. This is important because the “vicariously liable” party may have more assets and insurance coverage than the person who was directly negligent or reckless.
What is the most common example of vicarious liability?
Probably the most common case of vicarious liability comes from the employer-employee relationship. It is referred to as respondeat superior. The employer is held liable for the unlawful actions of an employee if the conduct occurs during the scope of the employee's work. A good example is the Exxon Valdez oil spill.
What are the rules for vicarious liability?
Vicarious Liability is a rule of law that imposes strict liability on employers for the wrongdoings of their employees. Generally, an employer can be held liable for any wrongful act committed while an employee is conducting their duties (and sometimes even when it seems they are not!)
Which of the following is example of vicarious liability?
For example, an employer can be held liable for the unlawful actions of an employee, such as harassment or discrimination in the workplace. An employer might also be held liable if an employee operates equipment or machinery in a negligent or inappropriate way that results in damages to property or personal injury.
Which of the following is an objective of the Fair Labor Standards Act quizlet?
The major objectives of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) are: 1) The establishment of a minimum wage that provides at least the foundation for a modest standard of living for employees; 2) A flexible ceiling on hours worked weekly, the purpose of which is to increase the number of employed Americans; 3) Child labor ...
What is the legal doctrine by which a supervisor can be held liable for the acts of those they supervise?
The theory of respondeat superior (employer liable for wrongful acts of employee) is a familiar doctrine to many business owners (and their lawyers). Simply stated, an employer is vicariously liable for the torts (or wrongful acts) of its employees committed within the scope of employment.
Who gave the pigeon hole theory in tort?
In the 19th century J. Holmes & Pollock developed this doctrine whereby intentional infliction of injury of any kind without justification was made actionable.
What is vicarious liability?
The term “vicarious liability” is made up of two words: “vicarious” and “liability.” Vicarious means feeling or experiencing something by reading or watching about someone else doing it rather than doing it yourself. Liability, on the other hand, refers to the state of being legally liable for something. As a result, vicarious liability can be described as a term that is used to enforce strict liability on someone who does not bear primary liability, i.e., someone who is not at fault. It is not a tort to be held liable for anyone else’s actions. It literally means that one person is responsible for another’s wrongdoings. The employer is responsible for his employee’s wrongdoings. And while the employee is behaving in the course of his or her job should this responsibility occur.
What is the maxim of "Let the superior/principal be liable/responsible"?
The rule stems from the legal presumption that all acts performed by a servant in and about his master’s business are done with his master’s express or implied authority, and are therefore the master’s acts. In this age of trade and business, the injured party/innocent claimant has been granted the right to sue a financially liable defendant. As a result, the injured party would receive an adequate remedy if a superior individual was held liable.
When an employer's duty of care is violated, but the complainant is unable to determine which employee did?
When an employer’s duty of care is violated, but the complainant is unable to determine which employee did so, vicarious liability may be created . An employer would not be exempt from responsibility if a specific person cannot be confirmed as the perpetrator of the violation. In Roe v Minister of Health, it was held that if the claimant established negligence on the part of one or more of the defendant hospital’s employees, the defendant authority was vicariously liable, even if the claimant could not prove which of the employees was negligent.
Why should an employer cover expenses incurred as a result of such activities?
Because the employer profits from his employees’ operations, he should therefore cover any expenses incurred as a result of such activities.
What did McKenna J determine about the contract?
McKenna J determined that the contract was one of self-employment based on the right to delegate. This is a potentially flawed response since many supervisory or department head workers are granted delegation authority, but the key point is that the test’s fundamentals were approved.
Who is responsible for the torts of his servants?
In general, a master is responsible for the torts of his servants, but not for the torts of independent contractors.
Who is responsible for a servant's wrongdoing?
If a servant commits a wrongdoing while on the job, the master is held responsible. Also responsible is the servant.
What is vicarious liability?
Vicarious liability is a common law doctrine of English tort law that imposes strict liability on employers for the wrongdoings of their employees. The most common justifications which attempt to explain the rationale behind vicarious liability include the doctrine of ‘ deep pockets ’, which states that the employer is in a better financial situation to incur the loss than the employee, and the concept of enterprise liability, which is based on the recognition that carrying out a business enterprise involves certain risks; given that businesses accept the risks it takes with the hope of gaining profit, it is only just for the enterprise to also burden any losses incurred by those risks. Through these justifications, one can infer that the fundamental role of vicarious liability is to ensure that victims of enterprise negligence are appropriately compensated. However, unjustifiably or not, in the last two decades, vicarious liability has expanded way beyond its traditional role.
Who said that the fact that the employer’s employment gave the employee the opportunity to commit the wrong is not enough to?
Lord Millett stated in the case of Lister, “the fact that the employer’s employment gave the employee the opportunity to commit the wrong is not enough to make the employer liable. He is liable only if the risk is one which experience shows inherent in the nature of business”.
How did technology change the legal system?
Technology was used to make the existing legal system more efficient. In contrast, the technologies being contemplated and designed for the coming decade are disruptive – they will irreversibly change the business of law and the administration of justice. Perhaps the two most important developments will be the introduction of online courts and the wider use of artificial intelligence.
What is the second change in the study of Latin?
The second change has been in the periods of study. Partly as a result of the decline in the study of Latin (and even French) in schools, students are deterred by sources written in ‘dead’ languages. Since Law French was used for almost all law reports until the mid-seventeenth century, and Latin for records until 1731, there has been a surge of interest in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries – which are, of course, just as interesting in their own way as the thirteenth century; and (well into a new century) they are beginning to seem longer ago.
Is the Ministry of Justice a prisoner's employer?
Whilst the Ministry of Justice was not the prisoner’s employer, it was held that the relationship was ‘akin to employment’ and the task being carried out was done on the defendant’s behalf and for its benefit. As such, Cox expanded the doctrine of vicarious liability by establishing that the Ministry of Justice is vicariously liable ...
Can an employer be held responsible for an illegal act?
As such, prior to Lister, an employer could reasonably presume that it would not be held responsible for an illegal act carried out by one of its employees. However, the courts have now systematically eroded an employer’s ability to distance itself from intentional harm caused by its employees.
Does vicarious liability apply to foster parents?
Lord Hughes, dissenting, held that if vicarious liability applies to foster parents, logically it also has to apply where the child in the local authority’s care is placed with ‘family and friends’.