dishonest and criminal acts

• Courts are more willing to impose vicarious liability for criminal or dishonest acts than for reckless or negligent conduct.
• In Dubai Aluminium v Salaam (2002), a firm was held liable for dishonest conduct by one partner because it was closely linked to the firm's business.
• This creates a potential moral hazard: employers might be punished for criminal conduct they couldn’t have prevented, especially when the offender is in prison and can’t pay compensation themselves.