Employer Vicarious Liability

The conceptual paper:

A Study of Vicarious Liability for Employer: Conflict Interest

Noor Ramizah binti Abdul Talib (035809)

University Sultan Zainal Abidin, Gong Badak Campus, Terengganu, Malaysia.

E-mail: [e-mail]

Abstract

. This means that where a worker injures a fellow employee in the course of their job, or injures somebody who is not a fellow employee (such as a visitor to the premises), the victim can claim compensation from the employer, who is vicariously liable. One reason for imposing liability on the employer is readily apparent. The employer (a firm or corporation in most cases) is much more likely to have the financial means to pay the claim than the individual employee. Furthermore, the employer is likely to have

After that, this paper will show the criteria for employer’s vicarious liability in employment status and in the progress of employment. The conflict interest in vicarious liability many factor when employer not be a honest and responsible with their duties in course of employment. For example, the client will be to give corruption lawyer to win situation and can success the case. But in organization of vicarious liability, can choose solution to avoid conflict interest between employer and employee for be a good vicarious liability. The paper will elaborate the study of vicarious liability and conflict interest between vicarious liability in

Michelin Tyres (1985) The claimant was injured at work while standing on a duckboard of his machine talking to a fellow employee. Another employee while pushing a truck in front of Harrison decided as a joke to turn the truck two inches outside the chalked lines of the passageway and push the edge of it under Harrison’s duckboard. The duckboard tipped up and Harrison fell suffering injury.

The judge in this case said that the test for determining vicarious liability was whether an employee’s act was incidental to their employment, even though it may have been unauthorised or prohibited or alternatively so far removed from their employment as to be plainly alien to it. Here the court found that the employer was vicariously liable and that the employee was acting in the course of their employment.

2-2 Principal/Agent relationship

A principal will normally be liable of the acts of their agents. The relationship is governed by the maxim qui facit per alium facit per se – he who does a thing through another does it himself. For example case