Strict liability for the wrongdoing of another in tort

Abstract

This thesis adopts a novel approach to resolving the present difficulties experienced by the courts in determining whether to impose strict liability for the wrongdoing of another in tort. It looks beyond the traditional classifications of 'vicarious liability' and 'liability for breach of a non-delegable duty of care' and for the first time seeks to explain all instances of strict liability for the wrongdoing of another in tort in terms of the various relationships in which the courts impose such liability. The thesis shows that, despite appearances, there is a unifying feature to the various relationships in which the courts currently impose strict liability for the wrongdoing of another in tort. That feature is authority. Whenever the courts impose strict liability for the wrongdoing of another in tort, the defendant is either vested with authority over the person who wrongfully harmed the plaintiff or has vested or conferred a form of authority upon that person in respect of the plaintiff. This thesis uses this feature of authority to construct a new expositive framework within which strict liability for the wrongdoing of another in tort can be understood. - provided by Candidate.