• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Is it fair that employers should be held liable for the negligence of their employers?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

´╗┐Anisimov Dmitry, A Is it fair that employers should be held liable for the negligence of their employers? When an employee commits a tort during the course of the employment, an employer might be held liable for his negligence. This is called the doctrine of vicarious liability, which generally operates in the law of torts. The issue of the employers? liability is debating, because it is a very specific area of law as a person is liable for the torts of another without express authorization. If a master employed a negligent worker, he should pay for his wrongdoings. Firstly, this essay will give an overview of the topic, then will discuss is it fair or not, by analyzing different situations. Finally, all main points will be summarized and the answer will be given. There are several reasons why the doctrine of vicarious liability is convenient. Firstly, employers are mostly wealthier than their employees and usually are insured to protect themselves from such risks and, therefore, they are better able to pay damages. Secondly, there is a concept that employers benefit from employees and, hence, should bear losses resulted by their actions. Thirdly, employers have a chance to choose employees and if they chose a careless one, they should pay damages caused by servant?s carelessness. ...read more.

Middle

Furthermore, the doormen in addition to the desire of revenge tried to protect his employer?s property and, therefore, the club owner is liable.[4] Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2001] 2 All ER 769 established a new approach in vicarious liability and overruled previous decision in Trotman v North Yorkshire CC [1998] 1 CLY 2243. According to the held, it is not enough simply to show that the employee unauthorized committed a tortious act, the defendant must prove that his servant acted of his own, without following the course of employment; it is a broader approach of the issue. It has been argued that in Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2001] 2 All ER 769 defendant company did not authorize abuse of the claimants and employees acted themselves, the employment only provided opportunity to do so. However, company was liable, because it did not perform its duties carefully as it did not know about abuse and, in addition, the ground for the employer?s liability was merely that they were better able to pay damages to the claimant. Now it might be seen as the law.[5] Slightly different approach is taken for crimes, committed by employees. An employer will not be usually liable for the criminal acts of employees. ...read more.

Conclusion

Word fair itself is a subjective and it is difficult to apply for all the cases. However, some generalization can be made. Firstly, the employer should be liable if he could foresee and encouraged wrong behaviour of the employee or when the servant tried to save master?s property. Secondly, it might be unfair for the employer to be held liable when the employment merely gave an opportunity to do it, but the tort was not authorized by the employer. It is very serious and arguable issue. There is a case law system in the UK and leading case on vicarious liability Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2001] 2 All ER 769 indicates what is fair. Maybe in future there will be new precedents, which will change attitudes the question. (1186 words) ________________ [1] Wild C. & Weinstein S. ?English law. Text and Cases. Sixteenth edition? Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd, 2010, p.448 [2] Wild C. & Weinstein S. ?English law. Text and Cases. Sixteenth edition? Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd, 2010, p.448-451 [3] Vicarious Liability. Free Tort Law Study Guide [Internet] Available from: http://www.lawteacher.net/tort-law/vicarious-liability.php [Accessed 19th March 2012] [4] Wild C. & Weinstein S. ?English law. Text and Cases. Sixteenth edition? Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd, 2010, p.848-849 [5] Levinson J., ?Journal of Personal Injury Law? December 2005 [Internet] Available from: http://www.1cor.com/1158/?form_1155.replyids=282 [Accessed 19th March 2012] [6] Introduction to vicarious liability [Internet] Available from: http://www.lawteacher.net/tort-law/lecture-notes/vicarious-liability-lecture.php [Accessed 19th March 2012] ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Employment Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Employment Law essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Critically assess how effective employment law is as a means of altering social attitudes.

    4 star(s)

    Thus, commentators such as McDowell, Singal and Zalik are correct in saying, "In the UK there is still the sexual division of labour with women in lower paid and lower status jobs."60 Julie Mellor chair of the EOC adds, "It is in incredible that after 25 years of sex discrimination

  2. Employment law

    In other to find out if Sanjay should act under the employee right we will use three tests to measure his statutes and the three tests are called Control test, organisational integration test and multiple tests. First is the control test this is when an employer controls the job to

  1. Employment Law

    The three general requirements for this procedure are, that the employer must not select the employee unfairly, the employer should make reasonable efforts to look for alternative practicable employment either within the firm or the group to which the firm belongs28, and that the employer should consult the employee and give him reasonable warning of impending redundancy29.

  2. employment law problem question

    In cases of dismissal by gross misconduct, a series of warnings may be particularly important, where repetition eventually justifies the dismissal. Warnings in this context will normally amount to a disciplinary action, so the employer should that this is given in accordance with any procedure laid down in the employee's contract or work rule book.

  1. Employment and Law

    Section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires employers to provide employees with a statement of terms and conditions of employment, which forms the express contractual terms between both parties and will be legally binding. A contract of employment like other contracts cannot be varied without agreements on both sides.

  2. Free essay

    Labour Law - Unfair dismissal

    date of retirement; to notify the employee of his right to request to work beyond this date; and to consider this request, and give a right of appeal if refused. The first step is for the employer to notify the employee of the intended date of retirement, which must be

  1. Limited Liability

    the business as a separate person; its members have no interest in the company's assets; it has perpetual succession; and can sued and be sued in it's own name. IMPORTANCE AND RATIONALE FOR LIMITED LIABILITY There must have some concrete importance and rationale for limited liability since all modern company

  2. Employmenyt law

    In the 1980's there were moves to try and redress the negative image these organisations had acquired in the post-war years and it is clear that the Acquired Rights Directive was just one element of a (frankly incoherent) pan-European social policy.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work