CameraIcon

SearchIcon

MyQuestionIcon

1

You visited us 1 times! Enjoying our articles? Unlock Full Access!

Company

LEGAL PRINCIP...

Question

LEGAL PRINCIPLE: An independent contractor is one who is employed to do some work of his employer. He is engaged under contract for services. He undertakes to produce a given result, and in the actual execution of the work, he is not under the direct control or following directions of his employer. He may use his own discretion in execution of the work assigned.
In general, an employer is not liable for the torts (wrongful acts) of his independent contractor. But, the employer may be held liable if he directs him to do some careless acts.

FACTUAL SITUATION: Ramesh hired a taxi-cab to go to Delhi Airport. As he started late from his home, he kept on urging the taxi-driver to drive at a high speed and driver followed the directions and ultimately due to high speed an accident took place causing injuries to a person.

A

Ramesh would not be held liable for damages because the driver was an independent contractor and not his servant.

No worries! We‘ve got your back. Try BYJU‘S free classes today!

B

Ramesh would not be liable as car was not owned by him.

No worries! We‘ve got your back. Try BYJU‘S free classes today!

C

Ramesh would be held liable for damages as he exercised the control by giving directions to the driver.

Right on! Give the BNAT exam to get a 100% scholarship for BYJUS courses

D

Ramesh would not be held liable for damages because Ramesh did not know the consequences of such rash driving.

No worries! We‘ve got your back. Try BYJU‘S free classes today!

Open in App

Solution

The correct option is C Ramesh would be held liable for damages as he exercised the control by giving directions to the driver.
The general rule at common law is that a person who employs an independent contractor will not be liable for loss flowing from the contractor's negligence. The owner will be liable for loss flowing from negligence in hiring or supervising the contractor. But, in those circumstances, the owner is not being held vicariously liable for the acts of the contractor, but is directly liable for its own negligence.
Hence, Ramesh will be held liable.

Suggest Corrections

thumbs-up

0

Similar questions

Q. Principles :
- An independent contractor is one who is employed to do some work of his employer. He is engaged under a contract for services. He undertakes to produce a given result, and in the actual execution of the work, he is not under the direct control or following directions of his employer. He may use his own discretion in execution of the work assigned.
- In general, an employer is not liable for the torts (wrongful acts) of his independent contractor. But, the employer may be held liable if he directs him to do come careless acts.
Facts : Ramesh hired a taxi cab to go to Delhi Airport. As he stated late from his home, he kept on urging the taxi-driver to drive at a high speed and driver followed the directions; and ultimately due to high speed an accident took place causing injuries to a person.

Q. PRINCIPLE: A Master is liable for the acts of his servant as long as he can control the working of his servant.

FACTUAL SITUATION: A owned a taxi agency. She had hired B to drive one of her cars. On 1st January, 2010, C called up A's taxi agency and asked for a car to drop him from his house to his place of work. On the way, because of the driver's negligence, the car hit a road divider and C was injured. He sued A for damages.

Q. Principles :
- A servant is one who is employed to do some work for his employer (master). He is engaged under a contract of service. He works directly under the control and directions of his master.
- In general, the master is vicariously liable for those torts (wrongful acts) of his servant which are done by the servant in the course of his employment.
Facts : 'M' appointed 'D' exclusively for the purpose of driving his tourist vehicle. 'M' also appointed 'C' exclusively for the purpose of performing the work of a conduct for the tourist vehicle. During one trip, at the end of the journey, when 'D' was not on the driver's seat, 'C' had apparently for the purpose of turning the vehicle in the right direction for the next journey, drove it through the street at high speed, and negligently injured 'P'.

Q. Principle: A Master is liable to third persons for every such wrong of his servant as committed in the course of service. For acts committed beyond the scope of employment, the master is liable only if he has expressly authorized the act. A owned a bus and he had hired B to drive it and C to be the conductor. One day, when B had stepped out of the bus to have a cup of coffee. C decided to turn the bus around so that it was ready for its next trip. While doing so, C ran over D's leg, causing major injuries to him. D sued A for damages.

Q. LEGAL PRINCIPLE: A servant is one who is employed to do some work for his employee (master). He is engaged under a contract of service. He works directly under the control and direction of his master.In general, the master is vicariously liable for those torts (wrongful acts) of his servant which are done by the servant in the course of his employment.

FACTUAL SITUATION: 'M' appointed 'D' exclusively for the purpose of driving his tourist vehicle. M also appointed 'C' exclusively for the purpose of performing the work of a conductor for the tourist vehicle. During one trip, at the end of the journey, 'C', while 'D' was not on the driver's seat, and apparently for the purpose of turning he vehicle in the right direction for the next journey, drove it through the street at high speed and negligently injured P.

View More

Join BYJU'S Learning Program

similar_icon

Related Videos

lock

Introduction

ACCOUNTANCY

Watch in App

explore_more_icon

Explore more

Standard XII Accountancy

Join BYJU'S Learning Program

CrossIcon