Turberville v Stampe 91 ER 1072 is an English tort law

English tort law

English tort law concerns civil wrongs, as distinguished from criminal wrongs, in the law of England and Wales. Some wrongs are the concern of the state, and so the police can enforce the law on the wrongdoers in court – in a criminal case...

 case concerning vicarious liability

Vicarious liability

Vicarious liability is a form of strict, secondary liability that arises under the common law doctrine of agency – respondeat superior – the responsibility of the superior for the acts of their subordinate, or, in a broader sense, the responsibility of any third party that had the "right, ability...

, also known as the respondeat superior

Respondeat superior

Respondeat superior is a legal doctrine which states that, in many circumstances, an employer is responsible for the actions of employees performed within the course of their employment...

doctrine.

Facts

The employee or "servant" of the defendant negligently began a fire which spread to and damaged a neighbour's house. The master argued he was not responsible because he was not personally at fault. Moreover he had directed the employee the proper method of lighting fires, orders which were not followed.

Judgment

Chief Justice Holt gave judgment.

Significance

Holt carried this broad vicarious liability into the commercial setting, noting that ‘the master at his peril ought to take care what servant he employs; and it is more reasonable, that [the master] should suffer for the cheats of his servant than strangers’ (ibid., 91 ER 797)

See also

More from Holt

• Jones v Hart 2 Salk 441
• Middleton v Fowler 1 Salk 282
• Hern v Nichols 1 Salk 289

On liability for strangers and acts of God emanating from land

• Sedleigh Denfield v O’Callaghan [1940] AC 880
• Goldman v Hargrave [1967] 1 AC 645
• Smith v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd
  Smith v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd
  Smith v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd [1987] was a House of Lords decision on duty of care in the tort of Negligence. It was concerned in particular with potential liability for the wrongdoing of third parties.-Facts:...
  
  [1987] 1 AC 241
• Leakey v National Trust [1980] QB 485

On vicarious liability

• Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2002] 1 AC 215
• Hall (Inspector of Taxes) v Lorimer [1994] 1 All ER 250, freelance vision mixer not an employee for tax purposes, ‘never been better put than by Cooke J’ in Market Investigations Ltd v Minister of Social Security [1969] 2 QB 173
• Lee Ting Sang v Chung Chi-Keung
  Lee Ting Sang v Chung Chi-Keung
  Lee Ting Sang v Chung Chi-Keung [1990] is a UK labour law case concerning the scope of protection for people to employment rights. It took the view that an employment contract requires that regard be had to the economic reality of the relationship, looking at factors such as whether uses one's own...
  
  [1990] 2 AC 374, 384, had own tools, paid by piece and did not price the job. ‘The applicant ran no risk whatever save that of being unable to find employment which is, of course, a risk faced by casual employees who move from one job to another…’

Articles

• O Kahn-Freund, ‘Servants and Independent-Contractors’ (1951) 14 Modern Law Review
  Modern Law Review
  The Modern Law Review is a law review published in the United Kingdom by John Wiley & Sons and which has traditionally maintained close academic ties with the Law Department of the London School of Economics....
  
  504, control test unrealistic today
• JW Neyers, ‘A Theory of Vicarious Liability’ (2005) 43 Alberta Law Review 287