Level 18
Level 19

Vicarious Liability

14 words 0 ignored

Ready to learn       Ready to review

Ignore words

Check the boxes below to ignore/unignore words, then click save at the bottom. Ignored words will never appear in any learning session.

All None

Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions
Provided a test to assess whether or not a person is an employee or an independent contractor.
Echo and Express Publication v Tanton
The person was not an employee as he was able to delegate work to his own employees.
Carmichael v National Power
If an employer is not obliged to offer work, and a worker is not obliged to undertake any work offerered, then the worker is not an employee.
Beard v London General Omnibus
An employer is generally not liable for an unauthorised act on the part of the employee.
Harvey v RG O’Dell Ltd
An employer is liable for acts that he implicitly authorised.
Century Insurance v Northern Ireland Road Transport Board
An employer is liable for authorised acts which are carried out carelessly or even incorrectly.
Limpus v London General Omnibus
An employer is liable for authorised acts which are carried out in a strictly prohibited way.
Lister v Hesley Hall
An employer is vicariously liable for the criminal acts of an employee if those acts are so closely connected to what the employee was employed to do that it is fair and just to hold the employer responsible.
Weddall v Barchester Healthcare
A modern vicarious liability case exploring the 'so closely connected' principle.
Mattis v Pollock
An employer is also liable for acts which occurred outside of the place of work if the sequence of events began at work and the employee had been encouraged to act in a particular way.
Conway v Wimpey
An employer is not liable if an employee gives someone a lift in circumstances where he is forbidden to do so.
Rose v Plenty
An employer is liable for lifts if the employee was carrying out his duties aided by the passenger.
Storey v Ashton
An employer is not liable for an employee driver who embarks on a ‘frolic of his own’; undertaking a journey that is separate from anything the employer has asked him to do.
A&W Hemphill v Williams
If the employee took a detour from the specified route but this was connected to the employment, the employer is liable.