Feb 18, · “In order to establish vicarious liability of an employer, there must be a relationship of employer and employee and the employee must be acting in the course of his employment” Jones, This is similar in the case of The Catholic Child Welfare Society and others v Various Claimants and The Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools and others [] UK5C Estimated Reading Time: 7 mins Dec 24, · Vicarious liability is a legal concept which refers to one party being held liable for the injury or damage sustained by another party, in spite of the fact that they had no active involvement in the incident. The intent behind vicarious liability is to hold the proper party accountable when harm is Estimated Reading Time: 10 mins Words9 Pages. VICARIOUS LIABILITY. The tort doctrine that imposes responsibility upon one person for the failure of another, with whom the person has a special relationship (such as Parent and Child, Employer and Employee. Or Owner of vehicle and Driver), to exercise such care as a reasonably prudent person would use under similar circumstances
Vicarious Liability Critical Essay - blogger.com
I would take this opportunity to thank the people who helped me in making this project which has been a learning experience. In that endeavour, first and foremost I would express my gratitude toward my professor of Law of Torts Ms Manjula Batra.
Her immense knowledge and teaching skills along with her helping disposition are where all of this stemmed from. Next, I would thank my seniors in the faculty who gave us guidelines as to how to go about the research. These are the people who were always there with me in the making of this project, vicarious liability essay. Heartfelt thanks to all the above-mentioned people.
Order custom essay Vicarious Liability Critical Essay with free plagiarism report. Books and Journals referred: Salmond, Torts, 18th Ed. HOLMES Common Law, pp. Law of Torts by Dr R. Law of Torts by B. The general rule in tort law is that liability is personal, i. However, in certain scenarios, the law makes one person being liable for the harm caused by another, because of some legally relevant relationship between the two. This is known as the doctrine of vicarious liability.
The doctrine of vicarious liability generally operates within the law of torts. It has become well-established in English law and historically has been called Master and Servant liability.
Vicarious liability means liability which is incurred for or instead of, another. A person is responsible for his own acts. But there are circumstances where liability attaches to him for the wrongs committed by others. The most common instances the liability of the master for wrongs, committed by his servant.
In these cases liability is joint as well as several. The other common example of vicarious liability is the liability of an employer for the torts of his employees committed in the course of employment. It is not necessary in such circumstances for the employer to have breached any duty that was owed to the injured party, and therefore it operates as strict or no-fault liability, vicarious liability essay. It is possible that the injured party could be vicarious liability essay an employee or a stranger, and the employer can be held vicariously liable in both situations.
The most important vicarious liability essay to establishing a case for vicarious liability is that the wrongdoer be acting as a servant or employee, and that the wrong done be connected to the employees course of employment.
Vicarious liability can only be imposed if it is proved that the employee was acting? n the course of vicarious liability essay. A reason for vicarious responsibility of employers is that employers usually are, while their servants usually are not, financially capable of the burden of civil liability. The theory partly owes its existence to the anxiety of the injured person to find a solvent defendant.
An act done for B by A not for himself but for B through without the authority of B becomes the act of the principle B if subsequently ratified by B. If one person commits a tort assuming to act on behalf of another but without his authority and that other subsequently ratifies and assents to that act, he thereby becomes responsible for it.
The person ratifying the act is bound by the act whatever it to be his detriment or advantage. Maxims i. Omnis ratihabitio retrorahitur et mandato priori aequiparatur.
Every ratification of an act relates back and thereupon becomes equivalent to vicarious liability essay previous request.
Qui facit per alium facit per se. Any person who authorizes or procures a tort to be committed by another is responsible for that tort as if he had committed it himself, vicarious liability essay.
The person authorizing is liable not only for the tort actually authorized, vicarious liability essay, but also for its direct consequences. Three considerations arise before a person can be held liable for a tort by ratification:. Vicarious liability may arise where the doer of the act and the person sought to be held liable therefore are related to each other as:.
Company and its Directors For vicarious liability essay purposes of this project, vicarious liability essay, we shall concentrate on the special relationship of Master and Servant. Master and Servant If a servant does a wrongful act in the course of his employment, the master is liable for it. The servant, of course, is also liable. The wrongful act of the servant is vicarious liability essay to be the act of the master as well.
In the case of Baxi Amrik Singh v. Their liability is joint and several as they are considered to be joint tortfeasors, vicarious liability essay. Who is a servant? A servant is a person who voluntarily agrees, whether for wages or not, to subject himself at all times during the period of service to the lawful orders and direction of another in respect of certain work to be done. A master is the person who is legally entitled to give such orders and to have them obeyed.
As a general rule, a master is liable for the tort of his servant but he is not liable for the tort committed by an independent contractor. Difference between servant and independent contractor A servant and an independent contractor are both employed to do some work of the employer but there is a huge difference in the legal relationship which the employer has with them. A servant is engaged under a contract of service whereas an independent contractor is engaged under a contract for services.
The liability of the employer for the wrongs committed by his servant is more onerous than his liability in respect of wrongs committed by an independent contractor. Lord Denning L. in Stevenson Jordan and Harrison v. An independent contractor is not subject to any such control. He undertakes to do certain work and regarding the manner in which the work is to be done. He is his own master and exercises his own discretion. Morgan v. The defendants had entrusted the job of keeping the lift safe and in proper order to certain independent contractors.
It was held that for this act of negligence on the part of the independent contractors in not keeping the lift in safe condition, the defendants could not be made liable. Govindarajulu v. Govindaraja Mudaliar In this case, after a motor lorry was entrusted by its owner for repairs, while an employee of the repair workshop drove it, vicarious liability essay, there was an accident.
It was held by the Madras High Court that for this accident, the owner vicarious liability essay the lorry was not liable vicariously, because the owner of the workshop was an independent contractor and not the servant of the lorry owner. In Manganbhai v.
Ishwarbhai the chief trustee of the property of a temple called upon an electric contractor to illegally divert the electric supply given for agricultural purpose, to the temple for a month, vicarious liability essay providing facility of lighting and mic in the temple.
The job was executed in a palpably obvious hazardous manner, and without informing the Electricity Board. After about a fortnight, the service line was snapped and the agriculturist, who was working in the field, vicarious liability essay, got injured by electric current.
It was held that the trustee, who got the hazardous job done, as well as the owner of the field, from whose meter and with whose knowledge such connection was taken, vicarious liability essay, was liable. The course of employment A master, like a vicarious liability essay, is liable for every tort that he actually authorizes. The liability of a master is not limited only to the acts which he expressly authorizes to be done but he is liable for such torts also which are committed by his servant in the course of employment.
An act is deemed to be done in the course vicarious liability essay employment if it is either: a wrongful act authorized by the master, or a wrongful and unauthorized mode of doing some act authorized by the master. So a master can be made liable as much for unauthorized acts as for the acts he has authorized.
Barwick v. English Joint Stock Bank In this case, Willies, vicarious liability essay, J. It is true, he has not authorized the particular act, but he has put the agent in his place to do that class of acts, and vicarious liability essay must be vicarious liability essay for the manner in which the agent has conducted himself in doing the business which it was the act of the master to place him in.
Yogendra Nath In this case, the owner of a car, authorized his servants and orderlies to look after the car and to keep the same dusted while he was out of town for a long period. One of the servants took the car to a petrol pump for getting the tires inflated and for checking the oils etc. Storey v, vicarious liability essay. While the carman was going on this new direction, he caused an accident with the plaintiff. State Bank of India v. No receipt or voucher was obtained indicating the said deposit.
The servant then misappropriated the amount. He also made false entries in the respondents pass book, vicarious liability essay. It was held by the Supreme Court that the servant had acted outside the course of employment and the appellant bank could not be made liable for the fraud vicarious liability essay by such servant. Negligence of servant If the servant is not careful in the performance of his duties and his conduct causes any loss to a third party, the master would be liable for the same.
In William v, vicarious liability essay. The House of Lords in Century Insurance CO. It was held that though the driver lighted the cigarette for his own comfort, yet it was a negligent method of conducting his work. The doctrine of common employment in India The rule known as the doctrine of Common Employment was an exception to the rule that a master is liable for the wrongs of his servant vicarious liability essay in the course of his employment, vicarious liability essay.
In Secretary of State v. was killed because of negligence of a fellow employee. The Nagpur High Court allowed the action. Stone, C. vicarious liability essay the view that the rule was an unsafe guide for decision in India. Pollock J. By this amendment, vicarious liability essay, the defense of common employment as such has been abolished.
Other case Laws: Mersey Docks v. Coggins ; Griffith A harbour board hired out a crane and driver under a contract making the driver the servant of the stevedores, but when an accident occurred through vicarious liability essay driver's negligence the court said he was still effectively the servant of the harbour board who stamped his insurance card and retained the power of dismissal.
Vicarious Liability AO3
, time: 6:29
Feb 18, · “In order to establish vicarious liability of an employer, there must be a relationship of employer and employee and the employee must be acting in the course of his employment” Jones, This is similar in the case of The Catholic Child Welfare Society and others v Various Claimants and The Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools and others [] UK5C Estimated Reading Time: 7 mins Dec 24, · Vicarious liability is a legal concept which refers to one party being held liable for the injury or damage sustained by another party, in spite of the fact that they had no active involvement in the incident. The intent behind vicarious liability is to hold the proper party accountable when harm is Estimated Reading Time: 10 mins Words9 Pages. VICARIOUS LIABILITY. The tort doctrine that imposes responsibility upon one person for the failure of another, with whom the person has a special relationship (such as Parent and Child, Employer and Employee. Or Owner of vehicle and Driver), to exercise such care as a reasonably prudent person would use under similar circumstances
No comments:
Post a Comment