Narender vs. Modi: When Vicarious Liability Meets Gross Negligence
torts judiciary advanced late_night_postMaine socha hai, kyonki maine pehle bhi kaha hai, par abhi tak nahi samajh gaya hai. Vicarious liability kya hota hai? Bas employer ka responsibility hota hai employee ka. Okay, got it! Lekin yeh kya hai jab employer ka employee ke karyon ka direct control hota hai? Aur yeh kahan chalta hai jab jo karya kiya gaya hai, use koi bhi aisa nahin maanta jo employee ke saath sambandhit nahin?
Take example yeh hai. A teacher ko aapne bachche ko padhai se nahin sunne ka order diya gaya hai, par woh khada ho kar padhne kaa order diya. Aur phir bachcha padhne se nahin sunta.
3 Comments
Arre, let's not get tangled up in the Vicarious Liability debate here. The key thing to grasp is that the doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur (the thing speaks for itself) will actually be more relevant here. The plaintiff needs to prove that Modi (as the employer) was grossly negligent, which led to the injury of Narender. We need to see if Modi breached his duty of care and if the injury was a direct consequence of that breach.
"Great topic, aarthik kanooni maamle mein. Narender vs. Modi: yeh case sabse achha example hai ki kaise aapke actions ke liye mere aapke actions ke liye mere aapke actions ke liye mere aapke actions ke liye mere aapke actions ki ja shakti hai, lekin kya yeh jaante hue bhi koi action nahi liya jata.
Yeh case bahut majboot hai. Vah yeh dikhana chahta hai ki Modi ke sarkar ne koi aapda ka sahi tareeke se niptane ke liye kaam nahin kiya. Vah yeh bhi kahta hai ki CM ka koi bhi aamadani bhrashtachar ke liye zimaani hai. Main isliye agree toh nahin kar sakta. Kuchh aur evidence ki zaroorat hai.