Dave is an employee of Empire Courier Service vehicle and has been involved in an accident with Victor in one of his deliveries. The accident occurred as a result of Dave's negligence. It is the sole responsibility of the driver to ensure their safety and that of other users of the road. In this case, Empire courier Service is not liable for Dave's negligence to cause an accident. Dave would be held responsible for the accident and for further assaulting Victor. The relationship between agency and Tort liability states that if an employee makes a substantial departure from the premises of the business and goes ahead to do their against or act against the directive of the company, the employer cannot be held accountable to any damage or action committed by the employee. Dave was a driver and was employed to provide courier service for the company from the business location directly to the destination, thus was not acting on behalf of the company when he decided to stop by Big Burrito Bistro to take his lunch.
The court looks at various elements to determine if certain occurrence happened within employer’s watch. The court would investigate if the employer actually authorized the employee to do the act. Other questions that would be considered is whether the act was done on behalf of the employer, did it occur within working hours, and did the employer know that the employee would commit the act? In this case, Dave was not on duty when he caused the accident since the Empire Courier Service does not provide for drivers to have lunch at Big Burrito Bistro.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
After the accident and both Dave and Victor were waiting for the police to arrive, Victor made a remark about Dave's employer and it made Dave hit him. According to unauthorized acts, if an agent holds no authority to act on behalf of a company and go ahead to act in a manner that reflects their personal motive, then the employer cannot be held responsible for the action. Tort liability also puts it clear in its relation to agency, that if an agent commits a tort that in any way injure a third party, then the agent is personally responsible for their action and the agency cannot be held accountable (Kubasek et.al. 2016).
Although according to Dave, Victor had said something wrong against his employer, Dave had no authority to hit Victor on behalf of his employer. Dave was a hotheaded person and the comments made by Victor affected him personally. Dave had worked for Empire Courier Service for some time without any incident until this occurred. Just because Dave had been involved in a physical fight while his previous company does not mean that Empire Courier Service knew that he would do the same while working for them.
However, I feel that to some extent Empire Courier Service could have prevented this incident from happening if they carry a background check of every employee that they hire. For such people like Dave, it would be necessary to counsel them and help them overcome their hothead condition. The company gave him a job since he was qualified, but they failed to help him overcome his condition that has a great impact on his overall work. Overall, after looking at the case, I believe that Dave should be held responsible for causing the accident and also physically assaulting Victor. Empire Courier Service should not be liable for Dave's actions since he was not acting on their behalf.
Reference
Kubasek, N. K., Browne, M. N., Herron, D. J., Dhooge, L. J., & Barkacs, L. L. (2016). Dynamic Business Law: The Essentials, Third Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Education
