Facts of the Case: -
Mr. Andrew Li, a post-man, while leaving a building in Carlton, was knocked everywhere by a bicycle courier, Mark Spice, who did not delineate himself but was wearing a green jacket with florid lettering which read high-velocity messengers which is the trading name of fast-paced Couriers Pty Ltd. The company conducts an inner-city courier business.
Mr Andrew suffered serious defacement to his knee and brought proceedings against Fas runnel Couriers Pty Ltd. Mr Andrews main argument was that Fastest Couriers Pty Ltd should be responsible for the negligence of its courier. Mr Andrew argued that an employer is responsible for the acts of his or her employees, when the acts complained of chance in the ordinary course of employment.
-
Based on the information provided, outline the issue(s) and the relevant legal rules which can be used to solve the issue(s).
The issue in a higher place is whether Mark Spice is an employee of Fastest Courier Pty Ltd and whether Fastest Courier Pty Ltd is liable to Mr. Andrew on behalf of its courier Mark Spice.
We are compulsory to establish employment in this end which can be done by the following different tests under commonplace law: -
-
Personal family test - A personal relationship between employer and employee
-
Economic reality test - where employee is economically dependent upon an employer
-
Control test - where employer determines the work to be done by employee
-
Multi - factor test -Factors like the panache of remuneration, the provision and maintenance of equipment, the obligation to work, the hours of work and provision of holidays, the logical implication of income tax and the delegation of work by the putative employee.
-
Who will be the plaintiff in this case? What will be the plaintiffs arguments?
`The plaintiff is a Person who initiates legal...
If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment