LAW TIP
An employer is only liable for an employee’s actions if they are done within the scope of their job. If the employee acts for personal reasons not in his duties, the employer is not responsible. DALEX FINANCE & LEASING CO. LTD. v AMANOR & ORS (J4/02/2020) (14 April 2021)
Merely being at work or using your employer’s vehicle does not automatically mean you are working within the scope of your employment. DALEX FINANCE & LEASING CO. LTD. v AMANOR & ORS (J4/02/2020) (14 April 2021)
If an employee acts outside of their assigned duties, such as running a personal errand during work, the employer cannot be held responsible for any harm caused by the employee. DALEX FINANCE & LEASING CO. LTD. v AMANOR & ORS (J4/02/2020) (14 April 2021)
QUOTE FROM JUDGEMENT
“Therefore, contrary to the argument of the plaintiff, the fact that an employee committed the tort while in the employment of the employer and was acting in a matter related to the work for which he is employed alone is not sufficient to found vicarious liability against an employer. Yes, Jabin was employed to drive the Fire Service vehicle and he was driving that vehicle during his working hours at the time the accident occurred, but at the particular moment of the accident he was clearly not engaged in the work of his employer but on a frolic of his own.” DALEX FINANCE & LEASING CO. LTD. v AMANOR & ORS (J4/02/2020) (14 April 2021)
LAW TIP
Setting “Whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to their claim” as a trial issue is wrong practice & lazy work and a stop must be put to it. DALEX FINANCE AND LEASING COMPANY LTD v EBENEZER DENZEL AMANOR & 2 ORS (J4/02/2020) (14/4/2021)
QUOTE FROM JUDGEMENT
“We take this opportunity to deprecate the emerging wrong practice where in setting down issues for trial in a civil case “whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to her claim” is put down as an issue for trial. The whole trial is aimed at determining whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to the reliefs claimed so how can that be a distinct issue? This practice is a product of lazy work and a stop must be put to it. This case also serves as a reminder to all lawyers of the first principles we learn in civil procedure to always ascertain the cause of action that arises on the facts of a case before drafting our claim. The cause of action determines the relevant evidence to lead and the law applicable in the case thereby saving resources and time expended in adducing unnecessary evidence and ending up confusing and embarrassing the trial. This is not the first time this reminder is being given by this court.” DALEX FINANCE AND LEASING COMPANY LTD v EBENEZER DENZEL AMANOR & 2 ORS (J4/02/2020) (14/4/2021)