Non delegable duty
|Non delegable duty|
Non delegable duty is the responsibility of the active person. In a 2002 Australian report, it was concluded that liability for a breach of an on-transferable duty is equal to an extension of the rules on liability for acts. They also advised that it should be non-persensitive for violation. More ruthless opinion said it represented a series of personal duties that were incumbent on employers and could not be passed on to others. It is difficult to find a single explanation for the duties that are not delegated. They can be grouped into situations (P. Giliker 2010, s. 177):
- those concerning political reasons such as security of citizens,
- taking care of property rights and sensitive parties e.t.c (P. Giliker 2010, s. 177).
Categories of duties
Three categories of duties (P. Giliker 2010, s. 177):
- those with necessity to avoid the limits of the doctrine of responsibility for actions taken,
- putting more attention on public safety,
- the last model left concerning other duties .
We often use primary responsibility to overcome limitations on liability for acts or to hold our boss accountable for risky activities, irrespective of the involved status of the employee. It is difficult to find a theoretical explanation for these three categories. “Due to their different historical origins, any ex-post identification analysis of the true explanation of all events, non-departmental obligations will be artificial, and in some cases may also be forced” (P. Giliker 2010, s. 177).
The most important question, "So how do you know if a care obligation is delegated or not transferable?" There is no test (described in cases or arising out of cases) eligible to find out if this obligation is delegable or non-transferable. To determine whether this duty of care is delegated or not transferable, you need to look at the court's judgment (N. J. McBride, R. Bagshaw 2008, s. 232-233).
Non- delegable duty is example (N. J. McBride, R. Bagshaw 2008, s. 232-233):
- Employment. Recently, it was noted that the duty of diligence, so that the boss owes his employees to make wise decisions to ensure that they are not killed or injured at work for him is non-delegable.
- Bailment. The obligation of the bailiff who owes the bailiff to make reasonable decisions to secure the property subject to the deposit is not delegated. An example is the case of Morris v. CW Martin & Sons Ltd. 0 In this case, the victim passed the fur company to the furriers for cleaning. They then sent the coat to the cleaners. The defendants were bailees of the coat for the claimant and as such they owed her a duty to take reasonable steps to safe- guard the coat. Unfortunately, the accused gave the coat to one of their employees who stole it. Lord Denning MR ruled that the theft of a coat by an employee exposed the accused to the obligation to ensure that they were obliged to protect the coat, and thus held the accused liable to the plaintiff for the loss of her coat. The fact that it was the employee who had been given care of the coat stole him, and it was important to establish that the accused violated their duty of care, that they were guilty of the plaintiff. If it was another employee who stole the coat, the accused would not be held liable, unless they or the employee entrusted with the task of caring for the coat were personally guilty of the theft.
All works in public places such as train stations and the highway lead to the obligation of non-delegable duties (V.Harpwood 2003, s. 316).
- Gliker P., (2010), Vicarious Liability in Tort: A Comparative Perspective ,Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom,
- Harpwood V., (2003), Modern Tort Law,Cavendish Publishing Limited,
- McBride N. J., Bagshaw R., (2008), Tort Law, Pearson Longman.
Author: Dominika Duda