There are two stages which are necessary to overcome in the pursuit of vicarious liability. Stage one demands that there is a contract of employment between the parties or that there is a relationship which is akin to a contract of employment. Stage two requires there to be a sufficiently close connection between the employment and the wrongdoing of the employee. Historically, the Salmond test was applied by the courts when deciding if a tort had been committed by an employee. The Salmond test imposed liability on an employer in two specific circumstances. The circumstances deemed to impose liability were that a wrongful act was committed, which was authorised or an authorised act was conducted in an unauthorised manner. The Salmond test, therefore, excluded vicarious liability in cases where the employee had committed intentional and unauthorised tortuous …show more content…
The appellant appealed against a decision that the local authority was not liable and had not owed her a duty of care. Part of the schools national curriculum obligations were to provide pupils with physical education which included swimming lessons. The claimant was a child and was dependant on the protection of against the risk of injury, the claimant was in the custody of the defendant implying that the defendant has a positive duty of care to ensure that she was so protected. The claimant had no control over the way in which the defendant performed its obligations. It had been the defendant who had appointed a third party to perform a duty which the defendant has assumed responsibility for. The third party, therefore was carrying out the instructions of the defendant. The court held that the negligence of the contracting third party did not absolve the defendant of its duty of