Tort Vicarious Liability and Negligence Case Study 2022

1
Running Head: TORTS
VICARIOUS LIABILITY & NEGLIGENCE
Name of Student
Institution affiliation

2
TORTS
We do not live in a perfect world where everything runs smoothly. This means that
human interactions are bound to be a cause of conflict of interests leading to injury or losses.
The law of tort then comes in with a way of determining and compensating (where necessary)
the people who have suffered damage, loss, or personal injury. Primarily then, as we are
going to see, there has to be a claimant and a defendant for there to be a suit. Generally, under
the law of tort, for a successful lawsuit, there have to be some elements that need to be
satisfied (Purshouse, 2015). These elements include;
a) There has to be a duty that has been fixed by law
b) Breach of the mandate set by law
c) The claimant must suffer damage that results from the breach
These are the general ingredients of any tort, but there are different types of torts with each
having its features (Mulheron, 2016). In this case of Betty and old Mr. White against St John
of God, Nursing Home is a specific tort that will fall under the tort of vicarious liability and
negligence. We will see how the two types of tort relate and which tort will be upheld and
why.
FACTS OF THE CASE
Molly Angel is a nursing sister employed by St John of God Nursing Home, and she
is obliged to supervise outdoor activities on the grounds of the home of the elderly patients.
The standard policy of the hospital is that no more than two patients should be outside on the
grounds of the Nursing Home under the supervision of one staff member and that patients
should not be left unattended. On one occasion, she leaves a patient unattended outside to go
for a cup of coffee. On the way back, she is with two other elderly women making the total

3
TORTS
elderly people outside three while she is just one. She spills hot coffee on Betty while rushing
to help Mr. White, who both suffer injury.
LEGAL ISSUES
1. Was there a duty to protect the claimants?
2. Was the duty breached?
3. Was there damage or loss to Betty and Mr. White?
4. Who will be sued in this case; the hospital for vicarious liability or Molly Angel
for negligence?
THE LAW OF TORT
Negligence
There has to be a duty of care that has been fixed by law for a tort to arise. Failure to
this will also result not tortious action. When determining the existence of the burden of
responsibility between the two, a three-stage test, as was decided in Caparo v Dickman
[1990] 1 All ER 568, will be used (Cavico, Mujtaba, Samuel & Muffler, 2016). The three-
stage test includes;
i. The consequences of the defendant's behavior being foreseeable Topp v
London Country Bus (South West) Ltd [1993] 1 WLR 976 (Herron, Powell &
Silvaggio, 2016).
ii. There has to be sufficient proximity between the two parties Hill v Chief
Constable of West Yorkshire [1988] 2 All ER 233
iii. The court also has to determine whether it will be fair, just and reasonable to
impose a duty of care
‘Ephraim v Newham London Borough Council [1993]
PIQR P156’.