Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
vicarious liability reflection paper
vicarious liability case study
vicarious liability case study
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: vicarious liability reflection paper
The English Law on Vicarious Liability
An employer is responsible for damage caused by the torts of his
employees acting in the course of employment. This is known as
‘vicarious liability’[1]. Essentially, vicarious liability is where
the employer is generally substituted in terms of liability for the
employee, the employee also has liability but the resources of the
employer such as insurance makes them more financially attractive to
the claimant. The mechanism of vicarious liability is arguably the
best compromise between the needs of tort victims and the freedom of
businesses as the employer usually has insurance to cover the tort of
the employee, making it more financially viable to the employer than
directly compensating the claimant. Also, the tort victim is usually
sufficiently compensated through insurance rather than if they claimed
against the employee as the master has the ‘deepest pocket’[2].
However, recent developments in the law on vicarious liability not
only makes the employer liable for acts that are ‘directly’ connected
with what they are employed to do, but it is now established that an
employer may be liable for the unauthorised acts of an employee, where
those acts are ‘closely connected’ with the nature of the wrongdoer’s
employment. The principle of vicarious liability can also burden the
operation of a business by placing a disproportionate amount of
responsibility on an employer. More money needs to be spent on
training, employee’s characteristics need to be assessed and higher
costs will be passed on to the consumer.
Vicarious liability is incident only to a relationship of controlled
employment, tr...
... middle of paper ...
...n any case the insurance
premium that covers the claim is generally cheaper than if the
employer was to directly compensate the tort victim. Therefore, the
principle of vicarious liability is the best compromise which could
have been reached between the needs of tort victims for compensation
and the freedom of businesses to operate without excessive burdens.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] P418. Textbook on Torts 8th edition. Michael A.Jones
[2] P419. Textbook on Torts 8th edition. Michael A.Jones
[3] The Law of Torts. 9th edition. Chapter 19. p413. John G.Fleming
[4] P419. Textbook on Torts 8th edition. Michael A.Jones
[5] Vicarious Liability for Employers. Andrew Scott-Howman. 14th June
2001.
http://www.bellgully.com/publications/emp_2001_06_14_liabilty.html
(5 points) Based on the facts of the case you have selected, is it possible the employer can also be held criminally liable? Explain your answer.
Tort, one of the crucial subjects of study when analyzing common law jurisdictions. Tort, is an action which causes another person or party to suffer harm or loss []. The person who has committed a tortious act is called the tortfeasor while the person who suffered harm or loss from such act is called the injured party or the victim. Although crimes may be torts, torts may not be crimes [] simply because a tort may not have broken a law. In fact, one must understand that the key idea of tort is not to punish the tortfeasor(s) but rather to compensate the victim(s).
Vicarious liability is a common law concept that refers to the liability that arises when one party, such as an employer, is legally liable for the acts or omissions of another party, such as an employee. This is because employers have a duty to take reasonable care for the safety of their employees and those of others who come into contact with them and their business.
A police officer, Colin Allcars (Allcars), is suing Harry’s Ammo World (HAW) for his medical expenses, personal injuries, pain and suffering. HAW sold a rifle to Dakota D. West without checking West’s background for felonies or drug use. Federal law prevents the sale of firearms to anyone with a felony or to anyone that uses illegal drugs. Dakota had been convicted of a felony and was also a user of marijuana. Two months after the sale Dakota’s brother took the rifle and took hostages. When the police were trying to subdue and arrest Dakota’s brother he shot and wounded Colin AllCars. Allcars is suing HAW on the grounds of negligence.
The tort involved in this case is that of negligence, which is defined as the breach of an individual’s duty to take reasonable care in situations where damage has occurred to another person or organisation (Legal Services Commission, 2013).
When a company hires a new employee, what they do not know about their new hire may hurt them. Most health care organizations are familiar with negligent hiring. But, it is impossible to say whether or not they are taking the necessary steps to avoid bad hires (Hauswirth, 2009). No employers, not even health care organizations, are invulnerable to a lawsuit and litigation resulting from their negligent hiring practices. In the current economy, with theft and violent behavior on the rise, it is essential for health care organizations to establish effective risk prevention measures in order to protect the company from a negligent hiring lawsuit (Hauswirth, 2009).
Negligence, as defined in Pearson’s Business Law in Canada, is an unintentional careless act or omission that causes injury to another. Negligence consists of four parts, of which the plaintiff has to prove to be able to have a successful lawsuit and potentially obtain compensation. First there is a duty of care: Who is one responsible for? Secondly there is breach of standard of care: What did the defendant do that was careless? Thirdly there is causation: Did the alleged careless act actually cause the harm? Fourthly there is damage: Did the plaintiff suffer a compensable type of harm as a result of the alleged negligent act? Therefore, the cause of action for Helen Happy’s lawsuit will be negligence, and she will be suing the warden of the Peace River Correctional Centre, attributable to vicarious liability. As well as, there will be a partial defense (shared blame) between the warden and the two employees, Ike Inkster and Melvin Melrose; whom where driving the standard Correction’s van.
Review the scenario below. Consider the legal principles influencing the likelihood of any successful action against Steve in negligence.
The concept of limited liability promotes recklessness and irresponsible risk taking. The argument for the return of unlimited liability is also an argument for separate legal personality to be taken less seriously. It is believed that, should it happen, would “eradicate the problem of corporate irresponsibility and unaccountability by identifying corporations more closely with their shareholders, encouraging a shift towards the older concept of ‘the company’ as an aggregation of
being at fault here, and may view the use of fault in this area of the
Vicariouis Liability and Article 21 I take this opportunity to express my gratitude and personal regards to Mrs. Stelina jolly for inspiring and guiding me during the course of this project work. I also owe my sincere thanks to the library staff, National Law University for the cooperation and facility extended from time to time during the progress of my project work. And last but not the least I must give my humblest gratitude to my parents and my friends for their support and encouragement. [GOPAL BOSE] OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY OBJECTIVES: 1: TO FIND OUT AND STUDY THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE VICARIOUS LIABILITY AND ARTICLE 21 2: TO DRAW UP THE BASIC TRENDS BY ANALYSING VARIOUS CASES METHODOLOGY THE BASIC METHODOLOGY ADOPTED TO PREPARE THIS RESEARCH IS DEDUCTIVE THAT IS TO STUDY VARIOUS CASES, TO ANALYSE THE LAWS IN THE SAME TOPIC
Introduction: Traditionally speaking, privacy has not been directly protected in English Law but, nonetheless, is a rapidly growing area of English Law due to pressing issues such as the role of the internet in privacy, unlawful interference on behalf of governments, and others that will be analysed further below. Privacy law considers in what instances does an individual have a legal right to informational privacy. Laws of this nature are typically considered as part of criminal law or the law of tort, but that has not been the case with privacy and has only enjoyed limited protection through the doctrine of breach of confidence and champloo of related legislation on topics like data protection and harassment. The Human Rights Act (the "Act")
[12] CURRAN, Simon, ‘When is a duck not a duck? The employee/independent contractor dichotomy’, Bulletin (Law Society of S.A) 26 (9) October 200etin (Law Society of S.A) 26 (9) October 2004: 23-26
During the nineteenth and early twentieth century if a worker was a victim of workplace accident there was no compensation or requirement of the employer to support rehabilitation. Employers were not responsible for injured workers or accidents that happened in the workplace. The main legal doctrine of Assumption of Risk governed workplace hazards, which required workers to assume and accept all the risks affiliated with their occupation (Share, 2012). In the 1900 's many diseases and injuries resulted due to unsafe or hazardous working condition. "The Royal Commission on the Relations of Labour and Capital reported in 1889 that many workers were being hurt on the job and condemned the state of working conditions in several industries" (CPHA, 2012). However, the federal government at the time did not act on the results of the commission report. In 1914, the province of Ontario introduced legislation where, "workers would be eligible for guaranteed no-fault benefits from a system that was wholly funded by employers. In exchange, employers were freed from legal liability" (CPHA, 2012). This was the first time the idea came up that injured employees should be compensated no matter who was at fault for the accident. This was the sign of the beginnings of change, but perspectives on health and safety still held employees responsible and accountable for all injuries and
The Common Law, also known as Anglo-American Law, surfaced in England during the Middle Ages in the 14th century and was spread all over the world with the British colonies. Although England had numerous connections to the rest of Europe in those times, one thing that was not similar was the use of judicial decisions as the foundation of common law.