LAW P2 CASES (VL)

Question 1

What is the case for the first point of VL (Relationship of employment)?

Answer 1

Cox v Ministry of justice, If the person carries on activities as part of the employer’s business liability can arise

Question 2

What is the case for the second point of VL (tortious act)?

Answer 2

Lister v Hesley Hall ltd, in order for VL to apply, there must be a tortious act committed by the employee

Question 3

What are the cases for the third point of VL (act must occur during the course of employment)?

Answer 3

• Rose v Plenty, employer was held vicariously liable because the boy was helping with the milkman’s duties which is within the course of employment
• Morrison supermarkets v various claimants, personal motive meant the close connection test was not satisfied

Question 4

What is the case for the control test?

Answer 4

• Mersey docks and harbour board v Coggins and Griffiths ltd, where a worker is hired out to another employer the original employer will normally remain vicariously liable

Question 5

What is the case for the integration test?

Answer 5

Stevenson, Jordan & Harrison ltd v MacDonald & evans, a person if more likely to be considered an employee if their work is integrated into the business

Question 6

What is the case for the economic reality test?

Answer 6

Ready Mixed Concrete ltd v minister of pensions, a person will be considered an employee if they satisfy the three conditions

Question 7

What is the case for the close connection test?

Answer 7

Mohamud v WM Morrison supermarkets plc, an employer could be vicariously liable where the employees tortious act was closely connected to the duties they were employed to perform