Karl owns a bike shop. His shop sells and repairs bikes. One of his employees, J

Question

Karl owns a bike shop. His shop sells and repairs bikes. One of his employees, Joe, was repairing a bike with one of those pesky periodic problems that would never occur when the repair technician was around. The customer said that the gears periodically wound not shift properly. Joe took the bike out for a test ride hoping to replicate the problem. However, the problem did not appear. Because it was approaching noon, Joe decided to ride the bike to his home to have lunch. On the way back to the shop, Joe negligently hit a small child and injured her. Discuss the liability of Joe and Karl’s bike shop for the injuries to the child.

Explanation / Answer

As per the doctrine of respondeat superior, the employer is responsible for the negligence and or the act performed by the employee within the scope of employment. It also fixes the vicarious liability upon the employers for the act of employee. In this regard, Karl as a bike shop owner could be held responsible. for the negligence of Joe.
Though, the starting point of the work and ending point of the work should be known to the employer to make the work within the scope of employment. But, in this case, Joe went to his home without asking Karl for Lunch and it is not the part of the scope of work, Karl did not know the movement of Joe. So, Karl cannot be held liable as going to home for lunch on his own, does not fall under the category of work responsibilities. So, the negligence will fall under the personal liability of Joe and he will be held liable.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse K
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.