Half-title -- Title -- Copyright -- Dedication -- Table of contents -- Diagrams -- Table of cases -- Table of legislation -- Preface -- 1 What is vicarious liability? -- 1.1 Introduction -- 1.2 Vicarious liability: an historical overview -- 1.3 The legal basis for vicarious liability -- 1.3.1 Distinguishing primary from vicarious liability -- 1.4 Conclusion -- 2 Establishing a general framework for liability -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 Identifying a general framework for liability -- 2.2.1 Key terminology and codal provisions in English, French and German law -- 2.2.2 The requirement of a wrongful act -- 2.2.3 The right to an indemnity -- 2.2.3.1 Limiting the indemnity right: employers and insurers -- 2.2.3.2 Protecting the employee from any claims in the absence of intentional misconduct -- 2.2.4 A common law problem: vicarious liability for exemplary damages? -- 2.3 Liability for the acts of others in other areas of law -- 2.3.1 Contract law -- 2.3.2 Company law -- 2.3.3 Public law -- 2.3.4 The relevance of French criminal law -- 2.4 Conclusion -- 3 The employer/employee relationship identifying the contract of employment -- 3.1 Introduction -- 3.2 The control test -- 3.3 Doubts as to the control test -- 3.3.1 Control and doctors who is liable for the negligent surgeon? -- 3.3.2 Response -- 3.4 Alternative approaches to the control test -- 3.4.1 A more flexible interpretation of the control test -- 3.4.2 The organisation and composite tests -- 3.4.2.1 The organisation (or integration) test -- 3.4.2.2 The composite or economic reality/entrepreneur test examining the totality of the parties relationship -- 3.5 Application of the `totality of the relationship ́test owner-drivers and bicycle couriers -- 3.5.1 The owner-driver -- 3.5.2 The bicycle courier -- 3.5.3 Distinguishing factors -- 3.6 Conclusion.

4 Special difficulties borrowed employees and temporary workers -- 4.1 Introduction -- 4.2 Lending employees the `borrowed servant ́problem -- 4.2.1 Dual liability? -- 4.3 Temporary workers: vicarious liability for casual or agency staff? -- 4.3.1 Finding liability -- 4.3.2 A less technical approach? -- 4.4 Conclusion -- 5 Other relationships giving rise to liability -- 5.1 Introduction -- 5.2 Relationships giving rise to vicarious liability beyond the contract of employment statute -- 5.3 Relationships giving rise to vicarious liability beyond the contract of employment case law -- 5.3.1 Civil law systems -- 5.3.2 Common law `relationships ́using agency and non-delegable duties to extend strict liability for the torts of others -- 5.3.2.1 Agency -- Vicarious liability, agency and motor vehicles -- 5.3.2.2 Non-delegable duties -- Overcoming barriers to vicarious liability hospitals and employers -- Broader policy concerns public safety and risk -- Other duties -- Confining the modern doctrine of non-delegable duty collateral negligence and the need for caution -- 5.4 A new model to meet contemporary needs representative agents or liability arising out of the ability to direct, control and manage the activities of another? -- 5.4.1 The `representative agent ́-- 5.4.2 The power to organise, direct and control the activities of another the development of Blieck and Article 1384(1) of the French Civil Code169 -- 5.5 An appraisal a new model to meet contemporary needs? -- 5.6 Conclusion -- 6 Acting in the course of ones employment/functions/assigned tasks: determining the scope of vicarious liability -- 6.1 Introduction -- 6.2 Limiting the scope of liability: acting in the course of employment/ones functions/assigned tasks.

6.3 Determining the test for `course of employment,́ `les fonctions auxquelles ils les ont employés,́ `in Ausführung der Verrichtung ́-- 6.3.1 The significance of policy -- 6.3.1.1 Case law examples -- 6.3.2 Prohibited conduct -- 6.3.3 The common law test: `course of employment6́1 -- 6.3.3.1 A wrongful act authorised by the employer -- 6.3.3.2 A wrongful and unauthorised mode of doing some act authorised by the employer -- 6.3.4 Deliberate wrongdoing and the search for a new `course of employment ́test in the common law world -- 6.3.4.1 The tests for course of employment -- (i) McLachlin J in Bazley: a significant/strong connection between the creation or enhancement of a risk and the wrong which results -- (ii) Lord Steyn in Lister: were the employees torts so closely connected with his employment that it would be fair and just to hold the employers vicariously liable?110 -- (iii) An Australian `close connection ́test? -- (iv) Lord Hobhouse in Lister: has the employer assumed a relationship to the claimant which imposed specific duties in tort upon the employer which he entrusted to his employee? -- 6.3.5 A different test for fraud? -- 6.3.6 The civil law test: the French example of `les fonctions auxquelles ils les ont employés ́-- 6.3.6.1 1960-1985: narrowing the scope of liability -- 6.3.6.2 1988: A new test -- 6.4 Appraisal: what does `close connection ́or `dans les fonctions ́mean? Can a workable definition be found? -- 7 Parental liability for the torts of their children a new form of vicarious liability? -- 7.1 Introduction -- 7.2 Parental responsibility at common law -- 7.2.1 Parental liability to their child -- 7.2.2 Parental liability to third parties injured by their child -- 7.3 Finding a framework for parental responsibility in tort law -- 7.3.1 Model One fault-based liability - English and German law.

7.3.2 Model Two vicarious or strict liability - English, Spanish and French law -- 7.3.3 Strict liability - French law after 1997 -- 7.4 Which model should a legal system utilise? -- 7.5 Conclusion a common law doctrine of strict parental liability? -- 8 Understanding vicarious liability reconciling policy and principle -- 8.1 Introduction -- 8.2 Theoretical justifications for vicarious liability in common and civil law -- 8.2.1 Fault culpa in eligendo/in vigilando and the theory of identification -- 8.2.2 Victim compensation and loss distribution -- 8.2.3 Risk and deterrence -- 8.2.3.1 Risk -- 8.2.3.2 Deterrence -- 8.3 Balancing policy objectives the modern approach to justifying vicarious liability -- 8.3.1 Prioritising risk the fair allocation of the consequences of the risk and deterrence -- 8.3.2 A proportionate response what is `fair and just?́ -- 8.3.3 Conclusions -- 8.4 General conclusion -- 9 A postscript: a harmonised European law of vicarious liability? -- 9.1 Two frameworks for liability: Article 6:102, PETL (liability for auxiliaries) and Book VI, Article 3:201, DCFR (accountability for damage caused by employees and representatives) -- 9.1.1 The relationship giving rise to liability: for whom is the employer liable? -- 9.1.2 `Within the scope of their functions ́and `course of employment or engagement:́ to what extent is an employer liable? -- 9.2 Conclusion: practicality and principle -- Appendix: Key provisions of the French and German Civil Codes -- France: French Civil Code/Code civil (C civ) -- Germany: German Civil Code/Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB) -- Index.