Question

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.

DECIDE.

• A. A is not liable because A was not driving the car.
• B. A is not liable because A was not in the car.
• C. A is liable because B was employed by her and was in her control.
• D. A is not liable because B was driving as per C's instructions.

Answer 1

The correct option is C A is liable because B was employed by her and was in her control.

Vicarious liability can be defined as a legal doctrine that assigns liability for an injury to a person who did not cause the injury who has a particular relationship to the person who did act negligently. It can also be called as imputed negligence. This doctrine 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. A is liable because B, as an employee committed the offence during the course of the employment.

Hence, C is the correct option.