Question

PRINCIPLE: Vicarious liability is the liability of the Master or Principal for the tort committed by his servant or agent, provided the tort is committed in the course of employment. The Master or Principal is not liable for private wrongs of the servant/agent.

FACTS: 'X' hands over some cash money at his house to Y, who is his (X's) neighbour and is also, cashier in a bank, to be deposited in A's account in the bank. Instead of depositing the money, 'Y' misappropriates it.

Which of the following statements depicts correct legal position in this given situation?

• A. The bank would not be liable because 'Y' did not do commit wrong in the course of his employment.
• B. The bank would be vicariously liable because 'Y' was the employee of the bank.
• C. The bank would not be liable because 'Y' did not do any wrong.
• D. The bank would be liable because 'Y' acted as bank's agent.

Answer 1

The correct option is A The bank would not be liable because 'Y' did not do commit wrong in the course of his employment.

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.

An act is deemed to be done in the course of employment if it is either

(a) wrongful act authorised by master.

(b) wrongful & unauthorised mode of doing some act authorised by master that is unauthorised in the way act is done by the servant.