Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Vicarious liability is a form of a strict, secondary liability that arises under the common law doctrine of agency, respondeat superior, the responsibility of the superior for the acts of their subordinate or, in a broader sense, the responsibility of any third party that had the "right, ability, or duty to control" the activities of a violator.
The concept of vicarious liability was developed in the Second Circuit as an extension of the common law doctrine of agency – respondeat superior (the responsibility of the superior for the acts of their subordinate). Pursuant to this doctrine, courts recognized that employers should be liable for the infringing acts of their employees under ...
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Pages for logged out editors learn more
Respondeat superior (Latin: "let the master answer"; plural: respondeant superiores) is a doctrine that a party is responsible for (and has vicarious liability for) acts of his agents. [ 1 ] : 794 For example, in the United States, there are circumstances when an employer is liable for acts of employees performed within the course of their ...
It is a maxim often stated in discussing the liability of employer for the act of employee in terms of vicarious liability." [3] According to this maxim, if in the nature of things, the master is obliged to perform the duties by employing servants, he is responsible for their act in the same way that he is responsible for his own acts. [4]
Vicarious liability is a separate theory of liability, which provides that an employer is liable for the torts of an employee under an agency theory, even if the employer did nothing wrong. The principle is that the acts of an agent of the company are assumed, by law, to be the acts of the company itself, provided the tortfeasor was acting ...
Morris v CW Martin & Sons Ltd, [59] for example establishes vicarious liability of thefts by an employee, where there is a non-delegable duty to keep the claimant's possessions safe. [60] However, the scope of such liability was limited to torts committed in the course of employment, under the second limb of Salmond's course of employment test.
Vicarious liability, course of employment, close connection Mattis v Pollock [2003] 1 WLR 2158 is an English tort law case, establishing an employer's vicarious liability for assault , even where it may be intentional or pre-meditated.