preview

Case Study: Hollis V Vabu Essay examples

Better Essays

CLAW1001: Commercial Transactions A Case Analysis Hollis v Vabu Pty Ltd [2001] HCA 44 Submitted by: Sindhuja Shankar SID: 305 127 950 3/10/2007 Table of Contents Introduction 3 Case Summary 3 Facts 3 Issues 3 Ratio 3 Decision 4 Critical Analysis 4 Commercial Implications 5 Legal Implications 6 Conclusion 6 Bibliography 7 Appendix † Research Plan 8 Introduction The case Hollis v Vabu Pty Ltd[1] confirms the long held doctrine that employers are vicariously liable for the negligence of their employees during the course of their employment. In comparison to cases such as Humberstone v Northern Timber Mills[2] and Stevens v Brodribb Sawmilling Co Pty Ltd[3], which appear to contribute to the …show more content…

The High Court also found that the contract between Vabu and its bicycle couriers contained a number of statements such as “ANY DRIVER WHO DOES SO WILL NO LONGER WORK FOR THIS FIRM” which suggested that the relationship that existed was one of employment. Although US v Silk[7] found that the individual parties concerned cannot themselves determine the nature of their relationship by contractual expression, the High Court’s decision is supported in considering the level of ‘control’ Vabu exercised over his couriers. Mason J in Stevens v Brodribb Sawmilling Co Pty Ltd states that control is the “right to control the activities of the employee” under contract. The High Court was correct in finding Vabu was significantly in ‘control’ of his couriers as the couriers has little or no say in the work/deliveries allocated to them and their pay structure. The High Court also found that Vabu’s requirement of his couriers to wear uniforms bearing Vabu’s logo has been used to guide the classification of a person as an employee. This statement can be contested by Dixon J’s judgment in Colonial Mutual Life Assurance Society Ltd v Producers and Citizens Co-operative Assurance Co of Australia Ltd[8] in which it was stated that classifying “B as a representative of A does not reveal…what was the relationship between the parties”. However, analysing the circumstances of the Hollis v Vabu

Get Access