Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesKickAss
they already are liable for the actions of their employees through vicarious liability
|
That's not necessarily true. There are many ways to avoid the attachment of vicarious liability, even in an employer employee setting. I'm not sure that there's a way out here, but it's not an automatic thing. I'd expect the argument would be that the actions of Tschetter were so unforeseeable and extreme that he had stepped out of his role as an employee. I have no idea what the Alberta precedent is in this area, but based on the lengthy record of driving related incidents he had the employer definitely has a hill to climb.