If an employee commits an action during the course of his employment it can be found to be vicariously liable for the actions of that employee In the recent case of Lister –v- Hesley Hall Limited Lord Millett said:-
Just as an employer may be vicariously liable for deliberate and criminal conduct on the part of his employee, so he may be vicariously liable for acts of the employee.
Even if it is something which the employer has expressly forbidden him to do. In Ilkiw v Samuels [1963] 1 WLR 991 a lorry driver was under strict instructions from his employers not to allow anyone else to drive the lorry. He allowed a third party, who was incompetent, to drive it without making any inquiry into his competence to do so. The employers were held vicariously liable for the resulting accident .
This can apply to a lot of situations, however there does have to be damage to claim for negligence.
2006-12-27 00:07:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by cassie s 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
It Obviously depends which country and jurisdiction you live/work/reside in.
There are many common law and statutory obligations. These usually apply, with local variations in most countries. Some countries and states have their own laws in statute and common law form.
Generally an employer is required to take care of the specific health and safety issues an to protect the life/safety /health and well being of an employee. These will be set out in a contract of employment and in a handbook given to new employees. The employee must also take " reasonable" care in all the circumstances not to self-harm or endanger others. Smoking/Drug taking and excessive danger allows the employer to pass the responsibility to an employee.
Trespass is a tricky one...best you check your understanding of the term- an employer cannot- like any other person trespass illegally on your property...they can in cases of necessity like flooding- but only to fix the problem. Nuisance is governed by local law....noise nuisance etc is usually actionable- keep a diary of the frequency etc. Employers must provide correct and adequate training and safety equipment for hazardous tasks- plus frequent updates and re-training.Some countries require smoking rooms to be provided to protect against secondary smoking. Your question covers huge areas of law...hope this helps
2006-12-26 12:24:10
·
answer #2
·
answered by christopher h 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hi Russ,
Assuming you are looking at UK law.
You are looking at three different torts here. In this context you are looking at the Health and Safety at Work Act.1974 and the following regulations
Management of health and safety at work regs 1999
Workplace ( Health and safety and Welfare) regs 1992
Provision and use of Work Regs 1998
Personal protection equipment at work regs 1992 (PPE)
Manual handling operations regs 1992
Health and safety (Display screen) equipment regs 1992
The rule in Rylands v Fletcher. (Go look it up)
There is a whole lot more but this will get you started.
Good luck.
2006-12-27 10:49:42
·
answer #3
·
answered by LYN W 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree... too long to answer here, at least not w/o specifics.
For instance, if such actions impact HIPAA or S-OX, you could go to jail. If this results in SEC violations... jail. If this results in death, maybe not jail (go figure).
2006-12-26 12:16:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by geek49203 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
far too many, go see a solicitor and let them charge you for their time unless you want to pay me to tell you the same as they'll tell you.
2006-12-26 12:22:13
·
answer #5
·
answered by Hot British Guy 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
This is simply too long to answer. Consult your atty
2006-12-26 12:14:29
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Full
2006-12-26 12:22:12
·
answer #7
·
answered by Bluefurball 3
·
0⤊
0⤋