View Single Post
Old 10-20-2009, 01:35 PM   #624
FlamesKickAss
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by valo403 View Post
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.
if he was still on company time then it wouldnt matter. From what I understand anyways, I am in taking a insurance liability course right now so it is fresh but I could be misunderstanding what I am reading. He is still driving the company vehicle as well. I don't really feel bad for this company at all though, the knew what they were getting themselves into, maybe just not this magnitude.
FlamesKickAss is offline   Reply With Quote