Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

vicarious liability - Coggle Diagram

- - - - An employer is clearly liable when they instruct the employee to act wrongfully, but they can also be liable if the employee has implied authority to commit the tort. However, if violence is inflicted as part of a private disagreement, it is not normally in the course of employment, as Warren v Henlys Ltd (1948) demonstrates.
    - - This situation arises where the employee is doing their job but they: ignore an express instruction not to do something, act carelessly (negligently), use unauthorized help (the decisions in cases are inconsistent and seem to be based on the question of whether the employer derives a benefit from the authorized help), or breach a statutory duty.
      - If the employee acts outside the course of employment, then the employer cannot be vicariously liable. An employee acts outside of the course of employment in the following circumstances: 1. carrying out an act not within the scope of the employee's work; that is, the employee does something that is not connected with what they are employed to do. 2. diverting from the proper work on a 'frolic' - there are contrasting cases 3. giving unauthorized lifts - again, there are contrasting cases even though the facts are very similar. 4. acting in excess of the proper boundaries of the work.