In a world where impulse governs the judgment of human beings, it’s not unusual to enter situations that exhibit mild to severe conflicts of interest, motives, or perspectives. As such, it is of utmost importance to have amicable ways to settle such disputes while minimizing their destructive effects on the individual(s), organization(s), and society. An important aspect of workplace dispute is the concept of vicarious liability. Simply put, it’s a doctrine that holds the employer responsible for the wrong acts of the employee(s).
In other words, one party may be held liable (or responsible) for the unlawful acts of the other. However, as always, legal terms are governed and subjected by cases; depending on the scenario, it’s important to effectively distinguish the extent to which the doctrine could be applied without amendment. Apart from this, the rules of vicarious liability differ from country to country as per the local laws of the nation/state. Moreover, there are a number of situations where it isn’t clearly defined as to who (or which party) is deemed responsible for the wrong action – the doer or the party bound to the former in a legal relationship. Also, there’s this issue of unintentional wrong doings (torts) and intentional wrong doings (criminal acts).
For unintentional wrong doings (torts), the compensation of the victim is prioritized, but in case of a criminal act, the punishment of the responsible parties is sought. In the end, the question comes up as – who is responsible for the actions, and who should be the one to compensate the victim? In light of this poised question, this brief essay will attempt to shed some light on the matter to reduce its complicated nature for the ease of understanding. It will begin with introducing the concept of vicarious liability in some detail, then differentiate between an intentional and unintentional wrong doing, further putting it in the context of employee – employer and contractor – client (muqawala) relationships. Then it will cite some cases to explain the exceptions (if they exist) to the proposed doctrine, and finally it will conclude with the amendments adopted in the local i.e. U.A.E. law and how they can be compared to their American and British counterparts.
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION
2. TYPES OF VICARIOUS LIABILITY
3. POSSIBLE TESTS TO TEST VICARIOUS LIABILITY
3.1 A) CONTROL TEST (EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT VS. MUQAWALA CONTRACT)
3.2 B) WORK-RELATED TEST
3.3 C) MOTIVATION TEST
4. TYPES OF TORTS
5. EXTENT OF RESPONSIBILITY
5.1 A) WHEN THE CRIMINAL ACT IS COMMITTED WITHIN THE SCOPE OF EMPLOYMENT
5.2 B) WHEN THE CRIMINAL ACT IS COMMITTED OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF EMPLOYMENT
6. VICARIOUS LIABILITY LAWS IN THE U.A.E.
Objectives and Topics
The primary objective of this work is to elucidate the doctrine of vicarious liability, exploring how legal entities are held responsible for the unlawful acts of their employees or contractors. It addresses the fundamental question of who bears the responsibility for compensation in various workplace scenarios, balancing the rights of victims against the liabilities of employers.
- Distinction between intentional criminal acts and unintentional torts.
- Analysis of employer-employee versus contractor-client (Muqawala) relationships.
- Examination of specific legal tests: Control, Work-Related, and Motivation.
- Case studies illustrating the evolution and exceptions of vicarious liability.
- Comparative overview of U.A.E. legal frameworks regarding vicarious liability.
Excerpt from the Book
A) CONTROL TEST (EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT VS. MUQAWALA CONTRACT)
The control test is used by the judges of courts to test the level of freedom which may be given to an individual by their supervisor/boss. It directly assesses the extent of control that is exercised by one party on another. If the individual is:
a. Instructed by the employer about the method of work
b. Clearly told about the time/duration of work, place of work, dos/don’ts of work,
c. Provided the necessary tools and resources required to perform his/her service.
d. Paid on regular intervals of time (like a monthly salary).
e. Not allowed to work for other employers during the course of work with their current employer.
f. Going to be directly affected in case the employer’s company endures a financial loss.
Then it’s most likely an employer – employee relationship. As such, the employer will be:
a. Obligated to provide their employee with special allowances such as healthcare, maternity, and so on.
b. Vicariously liable for the actions of their employees AS LONG AS
The unlawful actions were carried out with the interest of promoting the interests of the employer (motivation test)
The wrong actions were committed in the course of their employment (or during working hours) (work – related test).
The employer commits the wrong actions INSIDE the space or location they were authorized by their employer to work in (work – related test).
The employer is/was aware of their employee’s personality/actions (Al Tawil, 2015).
Summary of Chapters
INTRODUCTION: Provides an overview of the doctrine of vicarious liability and establishes the core legal questions regarding employer accountability.
TYPES OF VICARIOUS LIABILITY: Defines the scope of standard and dual vicarious liability through relevant legal precedents.
POSSIBLE TESTS TO TEST VICARIOUS LIABILITY: Outlines the criteria judges use, including control, work-related, and motivation tests, to determine liability.
TYPES OF TORTS: Distinguishes between intentional and unintentional wrongdoings in a business context.
EXTENT OF RESPONSIBILITY: Explores the boundaries of liability based on whether actions occur within or outside the scope of employment, including key exceptions.
VICARIOUS LIABILITY LAWS IN THE U.A.E.: Discusses the application of the doctrine under local U.A.E. statutes and its specific handling of contractor relationships.
Keywords
Vicarious Liability, Employment Contract, Muqawala Contract, Tort, Criminal Act, Employer Responsibility, Scope of Employment, Dual Liability, Control Test, Motivation Test, Legal Doctrine, U.A.E. Law, Negligence, Workplace Disputes, Liability Exceptions.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this publication?
The work examines the legal doctrine of vicarious liability, focusing on how and when an employer or entity is held legally accountable for the actions of their employees or contractors.
What are the primary themes discussed?
The primary themes include legal responsibility, employment relationships, the difference between intentional and unintentional wrongdoings, and judicial tests for assessing liability.
What is the central research question?
The essay explores who should be held responsible for damages caused by an individual's unlawful acts and who is tasked with compensating the victim.
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The paper utilizes a legal analysis methodology, reviewing case law, court precedents, and statutes to explain the application of vicarious liability across different jurisdictions.
What does the main body cover?
The main body covers the classification of liability types, specific judicial tests (Control, Work-Related, Motivation), the impact of employment types, and the limits of liability.
Which keywords define this work?
Key terms include Vicarious Liability, Tort, Muqawala Contract, Scope of Employment, and Employer Accountability.
How is a Muqawala Contract different from a standard employment contract?
A Muqawala contract, or 'Contract FOR Service', typically lacks the same level of employer control and mandatory benefits found in a standard 'Contract OF Service', often changing the scope of vicarious liability.
Can an employer escape liability if an employee commits a crime?
Yes, exceptions exist, particularly if the act is excessively dangerous, outside the scope of work, or unrelated to the employer's interests, as demonstrated by the cited case law.
Does the U.A.E. prioritize the 'Motivation Test'?
No, unlike some other jurisdictions, the motivation of the employee towards committing the tort is generally not considered a deciding factor in U.A.E. law.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Angshuman Banerjee (Autor:in), 2015, Vicarious Liability. Ethics and Social Responsibility, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/319763
