Publisher： Cambridge University Press
E-ISSN： 1469-2139|74|1|109-139
ISSN： 0008-1973
Source： Cambridge Law Journal, Vol.74, Iss.1, 2015-03, pp. : 109-139
Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.
Abstract
Liability for independent contractors generally poses few difficulties in the law of contract, whereas in tort it is a vexed question. The difficulties are only compounded by the governing concept: the so-called “non-delegable duty”. This article explains the differences and argues that no easy parallels can be drawn from the contractual position to answer the riddles in tort. Neither does “assumption of responsibility” help. There is undoubtedly a case for recognising vicarious liability for independent contractors when businesses and public bodies alike now outsource so many of their functions. This issue needs to be confronted squarely, not through unconvincing contractual analogies.
Related content
Access to resources
Recommend
Liability for Independent Contractors
Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 14, Iss. 2, 1956-11 ,pp. :
Tort—Occupiers' Liability—Independent Contractor
Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 16, Iss. 2, 1958-11 ,pp. :