Contrast to the arguments that the vicarious liability doctrine was developed to provide a just and pragmatic remedy to victims who suffer as a consequence of the wrongs perpetrated by the employee.

a number of policy objectives or justifications have been offered for the imposition of vicarious liability as stated by Lord Phillips in Various Claimants v Catholic Child Welfare Society & Others [2012] UKSC at 34, and by Lord Reed in Cox v Ministry of Justice [2016] UKCSC at paragraph 19, in contrast to the arguments that the vicarious liability doctrine was developed to provide a just and pragmatic remedy to victims who suffer as a consequence of the wrongs perpetrated by the employee.

The post Contrast to the arguments that the vicarious liability doctrine was developed to provide a just and pragmatic remedy to victims who suffer as a consequence of the wrongs perpetrated by the employee. appeared first on Essay Lane.

Reference no: EM132069492

error: Content is protected !!