Vicarious Liability: Concept, Robert Courtneys Case (Coursework Sample)

Title: Vicarious Liability
Subject
Learner’s name
Affiliated institute
Introduction
In day to day life, there are actions/activities which that are considered to be against the law. Under ordinary circumstances, when a person has an age defined in the state legal documents as the adult age, he/she is treated as independent and responsible for his/her actions. For instance, if an adult sibling is involved in a crime, his/her parents or next of kin cannot be held responsible for the actions. However, a scenario arises in which actions of a person can lead to another person been held responsible. In such scenarios, the person who is held liable for another person’s actions is considered to have a special relationship with the action doer. Such scenario is termed as vicarious liability.
As explained by Paula Giliker (2010) in his book "Vicarious Liability in Tort," Vicarious liability doesn’t represent a tort as may be perceived by many, but a rule of responsibility whereby the defendant can be rendered liable for the offenses committed by another person. In this case for instance, offences committed by an employee can render employer liable, not for his own actions but the actions of the tortfeasor.
Concept of vicarious liability
Vicarious liability operates on the concept that, the person held responsible for the actions of the tortfeasor played a role in the actions. It claims that, the persons have a special relationship (e.g. Parent – Son relationship) and therefore, the defendant could have used his/her authority over the tortfeasor to prevent to law violation. For instance, if a parent allowed a son drive out a car which later committed a crime, the parent can be held liable.
Robert Courtney’s case
In this case, Robert Courtney who was the owner of a pharmacy was found to have been diluting the medication prescribed for people with cancer. Evidence was found that the medication samples which had been collected from one of his clients were found to be diluted and thus the medication had a fraction of the expected medicinal content. He pleaded guilty and charged with several account, including responsibility for deaths which could have been prevented.
Applicability of vicarious liability
The application of vicarious liability as leading to Robert Courtney being held responsible, do not seem to be direct. As defined under law circumstances, this law involves two people, whereby one person is held responsible and suffers consequences for actions of another person related in a way. However, Robert Courtney being an employer and employee at the same time in his own pharmacy, vicarious liability holds. He committed the crime while working as an employee for his firm, but he was still the employer and therefore held responsible.
This scenario seems similar to the case of Valles v. Albert Einstein Medical Center, (Pa.Super. 2000), in which the doctor malpractice...