✅
vicarious liability
vicarious liability → employer is held liable for the tort committed by their
employee
2 limbs to successfully hold someone vicariously
liabile
1. relationship capable of giving rise to vicarious liability
employment/something akin to employment
current test to see if it is a relationship capable of giving rise to vicarious
liability comes from child welfare society
is employer more likely to have the means to compensate C and be
insured?
was the tort committed as a result of activity being taken on behalf of
the employer?
was the activity of the wrongdoer likely to have been part of the
business activity of the employer?
did they employer, by employing the wrongdoer, create the risk of the
tort committed by the wrongdoer?
was the wrongdoer under the control of the employer when the tort
was committed?
do not have equal weighting, it depends on the circumstance → according
to Armes
this has been used quite liberally:
Cox v MOJ → prison was held vicariously liable for negligible injury
caused by a prisoner working in the kitchen
vicarious liability 1
, Armes v Nottinghamshire CC → council held vicariously liable for
abuse suffered by a foster child at the hands of parents they had
placed her with
JGE v Portsmouth Roman Catholic Diocesan Trust → relationship
between a priest and the bishop of the parish could give rise to
vicarious liability
Child Welfare Society → religious institute could be held liable for the
torts of its members?
A v Watchtower Bible and Tract Socy → elders/ministerial servants in
hierarchal structure of Jehovah’s witnesses held vicariously liable for
sexual abuse committed by the Jehovah’s witness
not akin to employment however, was:
Kafagi v JBW Group Ltd → court was not held liable for the actions of a
bailiff
no contract will not preclude a finding of vicarious liability
in certain cases, vicarious liability can shift from the primary employer to
the temporary one
cases where vicarious liability shifted
Hawley v Luminar Leisure Ltd
cases where it did not
Mersey Docks v Coggins v Griffith
Biffa Waste Services
there is a list of factors to help decide whether or not someone should
be held vicariously liable
these come from the 2 leading authorities
1. was the employee who was loaned a skilled worker?
a. if yes, degree of control by TE is lessened
2. was the employee using the PE (permanent employer’s) own
equipment?
vicarious liability 2
vicarious liability
vicarious liability → employer is held liable for the tort committed by their
employee
2 limbs to successfully hold someone vicariously
liabile
1. relationship capable of giving rise to vicarious liability
employment/something akin to employment
current test to see if it is a relationship capable of giving rise to vicarious
liability comes from child welfare society
is employer more likely to have the means to compensate C and be
insured?
was the tort committed as a result of activity being taken on behalf of
the employer?
was the activity of the wrongdoer likely to have been part of the
business activity of the employer?
did they employer, by employing the wrongdoer, create the risk of the
tort committed by the wrongdoer?
was the wrongdoer under the control of the employer when the tort
was committed?
do not have equal weighting, it depends on the circumstance → according
to Armes
this has been used quite liberally:
Cox v MOJ → prison was held vicariously liable for negligible injury
caused by a prisoner working in the kitchen
vicarious liability 1
, Armes v Nottinghamshire CC → council held vicariously liable for
abuse suffered by a foster child at the hands of parents they had
placed her with
JGE v Portsmouth Roman Catholic Diocesan Trust → relationship
between a priest and the bishop of the parish could give rise to
vicarious liability
Child Welfare Society → religious institute could be held liable for the
torts of its members?
A v Watchtower Bible and Tract Socy → elders/ministerial servants in
hierarchal structure of Jehovah’s witnesses held vicariously liable for
sexual abuse committed by the Jehovah’s witness
not akin to employment however, was:
Kafagi v JBW Group Ltd → court was not held liable for the actions of a
bailiff
no contract will not preclude a finding of vicarious liability
in certain cases, vicarious liability can shift from the primary employer to
the temporary one
cases where vicarious liability shifted
Hawley v Luminar Leisure Ltd
cases where it did not
Mersey Docks v Coggins v Griffith
Biffa Waste Services
there is a list of factors to help decide whether or not someone should
be held vicariously liable
these come from the 2 leading authorities
1. was the employee who was loaned a skilled worker?
a. if yes, degree of control by TE is lessened
2. was the employee using the PE (permanent employer’s) own
equipment?
vicarious liability 2
