vicarious liability

• ready mix concrete v minister of pension: employee agrees to provide work in exchange for wage
• uber test: uber set contract terms and service fare and so is an employer
• cox v ministry of justice:

  • tort is committed by tortfeaser on d’s behalf
  • tortfeaser activity likely to be apart of d’s business
• hilton v burton: if employee is on frolic of their own, their employer can’t be sued
• century v northern ireland transport: salmond test: employers are ony responsibie for the compietion of authoried tortious activity or autnorised activity compietea in unauthorisea way which are tortious.
• close connection test: if activity of tortfeasor is close connection to thier job, employer can be vicariously liable
• lister v hesley hall ltd: close connection test