Mutuku employed Mwanzia as a petrol tanker driver. While petrol was being off-loaded from the tanker, Mwanzia who was standing nearby lit a cigarette. Unfortunately...

      

Mutuku employed Mwanzia as a petrol tanker driver. While petrol was being off-loaded
from the tanker, Mutuku who was standing nearby lit a cigarette. Unfortunately the
petrol caught fire and burnt the whole station and injured several people.
Mpole the proprietor of the petrol station seeks your advice on whom he can sue.

Advise Mpole.

  

Answers


Maurice
This problem is based on the principle of vicarious liability.

In this case, it is apparent that Mwanzia is Mutuku's servant as a truckdriver.

It therefore follows that Mutuku is vicariously liable for torts committed by Mwanzia in
the course of his employment. It is apparent that Mutuku was at the material time acting
in the course of his employment and Mutuku is liable for any tortuous acts committed
by Mwanzia. Although Mwanzia was negligent by lighting the cigarette Mutuku is liable as
the master, as the servant's conduct is irrelevant.

My advise to Mpole is to sue Mutuku for the loss of the petrol station
This is because Mutuku is vicariously liable for torts committed by Mwanzia.
maurice.mutuku answered the question on April 27, 2018 at 13:20


Next: Highlight four demerits of indirect production
Previous: Name two organelles in plants that can be seen under low power objective lens

View More CPA Commercial Law Questions and Answers | Return to Questions Index


Exams With Marking Schemes

Related Questions