单词 | Within scope of employment |
释义 | 在行使職權範圍內 The test used to determine the extent to which an employer is legally responsible for wrongful acts of his or her servant. An employer is only responsible for acts which the servant committed within the scope of his or her employment: Lloyd v Grace, Smith & Co [1912] AC 716 (HL). Where an employee while fulfilling his basic task, does something else, that act may not be regarded as being outside the course of employment: Kooragang Investment Pty Ltd v Richardson and Wrench [1981] 3 All ER 65, [1982] AC 462 (PC). However, if he does something totally unconnected with his job, he is said to be on a frolic of his own and the employer will not be liable: Hilton v Thomas Burton (Rhodes) Ltd [1961] 1 All ER 74, 1 WLR 705. An act is deemed to have been an act done in the course of employment if it is either a wrongful act authorised expressly or impliedly by the employer, or a wrongful and unauthorised mode of doing some act authorised by the employer: Sex Discrimination Ordinance (Cap 480) s 46. An act which is reasonably incidental to the task for which the employee has been employed is also regarded as being within the course of his employment: Goh Choon Seng v Lee Kim Soo [1925] AC 550 (PC). Whether the act done by the employee fell within the class of acts which the employer had authorised or whether the act performed by the employee was a mode of carrying out the task is ultimately a question of fact, and no simple test is appropriate to cover all cases: R v National Insurance Comm, ex p Michael [1977] 1 WLR 109 (CA). See also Frolic; Vicarious liability. 該測試用於測定僱主對其僱員錯誤行事的法定責任範圍。僱主僅對其職權範圍內的僱員作為負責:Lloyd v Grace, Smith & Co [1912] AC 716(上議院)。凡僱員在完成本職工作的同時,做起其他事情,則該作為不能視作超出職權範圍:Kooragang Investment Pty Ltd v Richardson and Wrench [1981] 3 All ER 65, [1982] AC 462 (樞密院)。但如該僱員的作為與其工作完全無關,該作為將被視為自娛自樂,僱主將不承擔責任:Hilton v Thomas Burton (Rhodes) Ltd [1961] 1 All ER 74, 1 WLR 705。如該作為為僱主明示或默示授權的錯誤作為,或為僱主授權的若干錯誤及未授權的作為,則該作為將被視作在其受僱用中所作出的作為:《性別歧視條例》(第480章)第46條。在僱員工作中可能合理發生的作為亦將被視作在其受僱用中作出的作為:Goh Choon Seng v Lee Kim Soo [1925] AC 550 (樞密院)。不論僱員的作為是否能夠歸入僱主已授權的作為類別,或僱員作出的作為是否為開展工作的方式之一,歸根究底,都是一個事實問題,任何簡單測試均不可能涵蓋所有情況:R v National Insurance Comm, ex p Michael [1977] 1 WLR 109 (英國上訴法院)。另見 Frolic; Vicarious 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。