Liability for Torts ‘Closely Connected’ to Employment (OCR A-Level Law): Quizzes

📚Quizzes
Liability for Torts 'Closely Connected' to Employment
Sign up to keep practising.Create a free account to play more quizzes and track your progress.

Practise the questions

10 questions from this quiz

Show

What is the fundamental question in determining vicarious liability per Lady Hale in Barclays Bank (2020)?

Is tortfeasor on own business or akin to it?

When is there no need to apply the five incidents test according to Lady Hale?

When tortfeasor operates independent business

In Cox v Ministry of Justice (2016), who was held to be in a relationship akin to employment?

A prisoner working in prison kitchen

In Mohamud (2016), did the employee's racist personal motivation exclude vicarious liability?

No, sufficient connection mattered more

Why was Morrison Supermarkets (2020) decided differently from Mohamud regarding personal motive?

Leak had no connection to employment duties

What does the 'frolic' concept from Joel v Morison (1834) distinguish?

Minor deviations from complete abandonment

For course of employment, must the employee be furthering the employer's interests?

No, close connection is what matters

What did the Christian Brothers case (2012) represent for vicarious liability law?

A wholescale review of the law

What principle from Cox (2016) emphasises about employment relationships for vicarious liability?

Substance matters more than classification

What did Ready Mixed Concrete (1968) contribute to vicarious liability principles?

Definition of 'contract of service'

Join 100,000+ A-Level students studying Quizzes with us.

Select your subjects, and get access to A+ resources today.