vicarious liability- tort

Question 1

what is VL?

Answer 1

. where 1 person is responsible for the tort of another

Question 2

benefit for C?

Answer 2

. allows C to sue the employee + employer + discover which is better placed to pay the conpensation
- may be because 1 of the parties is more likely to be in a better financial position or insured

Question 3

why justified?

Answer 3

. without VL, an injured C will be left without compensation
. justified because employer employs, trains + supervises employee

Question 4

why unjustified?

Answer 4

. holds employer responsible for actions of another- often someone they have no day to day dealings with- eg. big companies like tesco

Question 5

3 people?

Answer 5

. tortfeasor- person who commits tort + causes harm (employee)
. claimant- victim who suffers harm
. defendant- person liable for the tort (usually employer)

Question 6

old test for VL was to establish:

Answer 6

1. is the tortfeasor an employee?
2. was the tort committed in the course of employment?

Question 7

old test- why do we need to prove that the tortfeasor is an employee?

Answer 7

. employers will only be liable for their employees, but not for independent contractors (self employed)
. employee usually has a contract of service- eg. teacher
. independent contractor would have a contract for service- eg. cover teacher ( provide work for business but does not work directly for the business)

Question 8

old test- how do we work out whether a person is an employee?

Answer 8

. under the traditional approach, the courts developed 3 tests to determine whether a tortfeasor is an employee:
1. the control test
2. the integration or organisation test
3. the economic reality or multiple test

Question 9

the control test

Answer 9

. Lord Thankerton identified key features that would show that the employer had some control over the employee:
1. the power to select the employee
2. the right to control the method of working
3. the right to suspend and dismiss
4. the payment of wages
. test only now useful for borrowed workers
. more control over them = more likely to be employee

Question 10

control test- Mersey Docks and Harviur Board v Griffiths 1947

Answer 10

. crane driver hired by his employers (Harbour Board)
. injured person negligently during work
. employers set out contract- stated he was employee of Coggins but Harbour Board still paid his wages + kept power to sack him
. terms of any hire contract are not decisive + the permanent employer is presumed liable
> original employer was liable

Question 11

control test- Hawley v Luminar Leisure 2006

Answer 11

. bouncer supplied to nightclubs by firm
.bouncer assaulted a customer outside Ds club
. suppliers went into liquidation> C sued club
. decided the club exercise so much control over him that they employed him