| 单词 | Vicarious liability |
| 释义 | 轉承法律責任 The liability imposed on one person for the wrongful act of another on the basis of the legal relationship between them, usually that of employer and employee. Agency - The liability imposed on a principal who employs another person to perform work on the principal’s behalf for tortious acts performed by the person within the scope of his or her authority: So Wing Kwong v Cheung Chi Kwong [1999] 3 HKLRD 689; Morgans v Launchbury [1973] AC 127, 2 All ER 606 (HL). In the context of vicarious liability, the word ‘agent’ has a wider connotation than ‘employee’ does: an independent contractor or an employee may be an agent; a person may also be an agent although he is not ‘employed’ by the principal in a technical sense: Wong Wai Hing v Hui Wei Lee [2001] 2 HKC 19, 1 HKLRD 736 (CA). A company is liable to be sued for a tort committed by its agent if an action in tort would lie against an individual and the agent is acting in the course of his employment or within the ostensible scope of his authority, and the act complained of is one which the company might possibly be authorised by its constitution to commit: Briess v Woolley [1954] AC 333, 1 All ER 909 (HL). See also Agent; Personal liability; Principal. Employment - The liability of an employer to third persons for the tortious acts of an employee which the employer actually or impliedly authorises. The acts must be committed in the course of employment, while the employee is acting within the scope of his or her authority and performing the employment duties, or be acts incidental to the employment duties: Ming An Insurance Co (HK) Ltd v Ritz Carlton Ltd [2002] 3 HKLRD 844 (CFA). In order to render an employer vicariously liable it is necessary to prove that the employee has been guilty of a breach of duty towards the person injured: Yeung Kam Fuk v Len Shing Construction Co Ltd [1986] 1 HKC 160; Staveley Iron and Chemical Co Ltd v Jones [1956] AC 627, 1 All ER 403 (HL). A tortious act that is so connected with an act the employee is authorised to perform as to amount to a mode of performing the authorised act, is an act within the course of employment: Ming An Insurance Co (HK) Ltd v Ritz-Carlton Ltd [2003] 1 HKC 225 (CFA). An employer cannot be vicariously liable for an attempt by his employee, servant or agent to commit a crime even if he may be vicariously liable for the completed crime: Gardner v Akeroyd [1952] 2 QB 743, 2 All ER 306. See also Course of employment; Employer’s personal liability. 根據兩人之間的法律責任，其中一人就其錯誤作為將法律責任加諸予另一人身上，通常是僱主和僱員之間的法律責任。 代理 - 如主事人／委託人僱用另一人代表他／她履行工作，則可加諸主事人／委託人由該另一人在他／她的權限範圍內作出的侵權行為的法律責任：So Wing Kwong v Cheung Chi Kwong [1999] 3 HKLRD 689; Morgans v Launchbury [1973] AC 127, 2 All ER 606 (上議院)。就轉承法律責任的文義而言，「代理人」一詞較「僱員」一詞有更廣泛的含意：獨立的承辦商或僱員可以是代理人；但即使一人在技術上沒有被主事人／委託人聘用，他／她亦可以是代理人：Wong Wai Hing v Hui Wei Lee [2001] 2 HKC 19, [2001] 1 HKLRD 736 (上訴法庭)。如侵權行為訴訟會提出針對某個人的訴訟，此外有關的代理人是在其受僱工作的過程中行事，或在其權限的顯然範圍內行事，而被申訴的行為是有關公司可藉其章程授權作出的作為，則有關公司可被起訴其代理人所犯的侵權行為： Briess v Woolley [1954] AC 333, 1 All ER 909 (上議院)。 另見 Agent; Personal liability; Principal。 僱傭 - 當僱主實際上或隱含地授權僱員作出侵權行為，僱主對某第三者就該侵權行為負上的法律責任。 有關的行為必須在受僱工作期間作出，即該僱員是在他／她的權限範圍內行事，及正在履行有關受僱工作的責任，或該行為和受僱工作的責任是有連帶關係的：Ming An Insurance Co (HK) Ltd v Ritz Carlton Ltd [2002] 3 HKLRD 844 （終審法院）。為使僱主負上轉承法律責任，必須證明該僱員對蒙受損害的人已犯了失職行為：Yeung Kam Fuk v Len Shing Construction Co Ltd [1986] 1 HKC 160; Staveley Iron and Chemical Co Ltd v Jones [1956] AC 627, 1 All ER 403 （上議院）。如某侵權行為和僱員獲授權履行的行為很有關連，相當於履行有關授權行為般的方式，則該侵權行為屬於在受僱工作期間中作出的行為：Ming An Insurance Co (HK) Ltd v Ritz-Carlton Ltd [2003] 1 HKC 225 （終審法院）。即使僱主可就既遂罪行負上轉承法律責任，但僱主不會因其僱員、受僱人或代理人企圖犯罪而負上轉承法律責任：Gardner v Akeroyd [1952] 2 QB 743, 2 All ER 306。另見 Course of employment; Employer’s personal liability。 |
| 随便看 |
|
法律词典收录了8080条英汉双解法律词条，基本涵盖了常用法律英语单词及短语词组的翻译及用法，是法律学习的有利工具。