Re: Question re Respondeat Superior

Minarchist — Sat, 24 Mar 2012 00:16:02 GMT

Here is an interesting case which falls between full respondeat superior and preemptive indemnification of the employer by the employee.

http://www.safetyphoto.co.uk/subsite/case%20i%20j%20k%20l/lister_v_romford_ice__cold_storage.htm

Question re Respondeat Superior

Minarchist — Sat, 24 Mar 2012 00:07:55 GMT

Respondeat Superior (Latin: let the master answer) is defined as: "A common-law doctrine that makes an employer liable for the actions of an employee when the actions take place within the scope of employment."

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Respondeat+superior

My question: can an employee preemptively indemnify an employer by contract?

For example, can the employee of a corporation sign a contract with the corporation accepting sole responsibility for any future torts committed by that employee while acting in his capacity as employee of the corporation? And if this employee subsequently commits a tort, can the victim have a claim against the corporation or not?

At first glance, I want to say no - the victim of the tort was not privy to the contract and never agreed to limit his right to restitution to the employee. On the other hand, it seems to me that if the person directly responsible for the tort (the employee) wishes to take full responsibility, he should be able to do so.

Thoughts?

Political Theory

Re: Question re Respondeat Superior

Question re Respondeat Superior