BLOG

News from a recent court ruling has been trending for days now. It emphasized on the fact that some limitations have been placed on the principles of vicarious liability. This principle states that compensation must not only come from the individual who causes a victim harm, a third party must also pay compensation.

The third party must be connected to the guilty party. Consequently, the extent of the relationship between both parties will determine whether compensation will be granted. It is, however, left to the injured party to affirm the relationship of the negligent individual who caused the harm, with his or her employer. In the case of an individual causing damage as an employee, the employers will also be held liable for every damage caused.

Facts of the case

A plaintiff brought a personal injury case before an appellate court in Florida. The plaintiff accused a driver of causing an accident. The driver who worked with a company caused an accident while going out for deliveries. The vehicle was damaged, and the victim was seeking for compensation for damages. In this situation, the plaintiff was not only demanding compensation from the driver, but also from his employer. Many points were argued between the plaintiff and the company. After discussing the facts, the defendant stated that the driver was not on official duty for the company but was working as an independent driver at the moment when the accident happened. The plaintiff argued that the driver wore the company name and logo, therefore, making him as a staff of the company. He also insisted that the driver could not be excluded as a staff of the company since he wore the company’s logo on his shirt

The defendant, in his stance, noted that the driver simply wore the company’s logo for easy identification for his deliveries. Adorning the company’s logo will make it easier for him to make deliveries to customers who already identify him with the company. The contract between the driver and his employer was shown to the Florida, injury attorney. The contract stated that the driver was to act independently from the company. He was to bear every cost that he may accrue in the course of his work.

Hence, the company is not responsible for his actions or any accident that may occur, or that has occurred. The Florida injury attorney successfully argued the company’s case, and the court later dismissed the case. The court supported the company in its claims. The reason is that facts were shown and they proved that the driver only wore the company’s logo so that customers will easily identify him. The court also affirmed that the company is not in any way liable to pay up any compensation because the driver acted independently as it was stated in his contract.