Read more
Zusatztext As the ongoing debate on vicarious liability rages on — more or less, incessantly — this carefully researched treatise provides a much-needed alternative perspective — a critical eye indeed — on this contentious subject. Corporate lawyers, particularly of the comparative variety, will find this book a rather fascinating read. Informationen zum Autor Anthony Gray is Professor of Law at Bond University, Australia. Vorwort A detailed study of the law vicarious liability in tort, offering a detailed historical and doctrinal analysis of the current law, and an argument for reform that places agency at the centre of the doctrine. Zusammenfassung The scope of vicarious liability has significantly expanded since its original conception. Today employers are being found liable for actions of employees that they did not authorise, and never would have authorised if asked. They are being held liable for an employee’s criminal activity. In the related strict liability field of non-delegable duties, they are being held liable for wrongdoing of independent contractors.Notions of strict liability have grown increasingly isolated in the law of tort, given the exponential growth in the tort of negligence. They require intellectual justification. Such a justification has proven to be elusive and largely unsatisfactory in relation to vicarious liability and to concepts of non-delegable duty. The law of three jurisdictions studied has now apparently embraced the ‘enterprise risk’ theory to rationalise the imposition of vicarious liability. This book subjects this theory to strong critique by arguing that it has many weaknesses, which the courts should acknowledge. It suggests that a rationalisation of the liability of an employer for the actions of an employee lies in more traditional legal doctrine which would serve to narrow the circumstances in which an employer is legally liable for a wrong committed by an employee. Inhaltsverzeichnis PART I: OUTLINE OF DEVELOPMENT OF VICARIOUS LIABILITY IN CHOSEN JURISDICTIONS Introduction to Part I 1. Developments in English Legal History Historical Development of Vicarious Liability Until the Early Twentieth Century Vicarious Liability in the Context of Other Developments in Tort Law Summary and Reflections on Historical Development of Vicarious Liability 2. Developments in United Kingdom Vicarious Liability Law: Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries Development Most Recent Developments Some Critique and Reflection on United Kingdom Case Law 3. Developments in Australian Case Law Historical Development Most Recent Developments Some Critique and Reflection on Australian Case Law 4. Developments in North American Case Law Canadian Development United States Developments Conclusion to Part I PART II: THEORIES OF VICARIOUS LIABILITY Introduction to Part II 5. Enterprise Risk Theory Scholarly Support for Enterprise Risk Theory 6. Criticisms of Enterprise Risk Theory Summary of Weaknesses in Relation to Enterprise Risk as a Species of Strict Liability to Justify the Imposition of Vicarious Liability Historical Weaknesses The Theory Does Not Explain the Existing Contours of Vicarious Liability The Theory Seems Applicable as a General Principle by which an Organisation is Liable to Others for Harms Caused, but is Not So Applied It Makes ‘Brave’ Assumptions about Loss Spreading and Insurance It Does Not Describe How Judges Actually Decide Tort Cases, and Does Not Describe How Judges Should Decide Tort Cases It Relies on Inherently Ambiguous Concepts Deterrence 7. Other Theories Evidentiary Considerations Deep Pockets Fair, Just and Reasonable Conclusion 8. Agency Theory Introduction to Agency Theory of Vicarious Liability Pragmatism and Principle (a) Argument that the Act of the Agent (Employee) is in Effect the Act of the Princi...
