Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Vicarious Liability - Coggle Diagram

- - - - Can the tortfeasor delegate their work to someone else? (Express v Echo).
    - - This is known as the traditional test - if the employer has the right to control what the tortfeasor does and the way in which it is done
        
        Yewens v Noakes (1880) the "master" and "servant" relationship already established
        
        Hawley v Luminar Leisure - modern case of the test
    - - Made in Ready Mixed Concrete
      - Is the tortfeasor paid for the work they are doing by the employer and is the tortfeasor obliged to do the work? Mutuality of obligations (Carmichael v National Power)
        
        They are more than likely employed if they are meeting these standards
- - - - A frolic of their own is an event that
        
        Hilton v Thomas Burton
        
        Not liable as they weren't acting the course of their employment and so the employer isn't liable but rather the employee themselves.
    - - Century Insurance
    - - Rose v Plenty
  - - - Warden in a care home and sexually assaulted some boys
        
        100% not what they were employed to do.
    - - Was the role closely connected to the tort committed?
    - - CCWS v VC
      - Does it benefit the employer in using the tort in their own benefit and further their own business ventures?
      - Have they used the tort in a way that would increase in the chances of wrong doing?
- - - - Cox v MoJ
      - Christian Brothers