 The general rule is, that the master is answerable for every such wrong of the servant or agent as is committed in the course of the service and for the master's benefit, though no express command or privity of the master be proved.  The Canadian Law Times - Pàgina 8721908Visualització completa - Sobre aquest llibre
 | Alfred Bishop Morine - 1909 - 754 pàgines
...main action, and not those merely which are necessary to the effectually doing it.7 The general rule is that the master is answerable for every such wrong...course of the service and for the master's benefit, although no express command or privity of the Master be proved.8 In an action for damages for injuries... | |
 | 1909 - 1282 pàgines
...thus states the rule: "The general rule is that the master is answerable for every such wrong of tlie servant or agent as is committed In the course of the service and fur the master's benefit, though no express command or privity of the master be proved." That statement... | |
 | Edward Betley Brown, L. S. Le Vernois, Esten Kenneth Williams - 1910 - 774 pàgines
...English Joint Stock Bank, LR 2 Ex. 265, Willes, J., lays down the law as, follows: " The general rule is, that the master is answerable for every such wrong...express command or privity of the master be proved." This statement of the law has been approved of in many subsequent cases. See Beven' on Negligence,... | |
 | James Parker Hall, James De Witt Andrews - 1910 - 468 pàgines
...said, "No sensible distinction can be drawn between the case of fraud and the case of any other wrong. The master is answerable for every such wrong of the...course of the service and for the master's benefit. ... .It is true, he has not authorized the particular act, but he has put his agent in his place to... | |
 | George Louis Reinhard - 1911 - 852 pàgines
...tort. "The general rule," said Willes, J., in Barwick v. English Joint Stock Bank, LR 2 Ex. 259, 265, "is that the master is answerable for every such wrong...express command or privity of the master be proved." See also Limpus v. London General Omnibus Co., 1 H. & C. 526. The fraud was in respect to a matter... | |
 | George Spencer Bower - 1911 - 568 pàgines
...the case of any other icrong. The general rule is, that the master is answerable for every such urong of the servant or agent as is committed in the course...service, and for the -master's benefit, though no ехргеях command or privily of the mailer be proved." The above rule, as formulated by the Exchequer... | |
 | Edward Betley Brown, L. S. Le Vernois, Esten Kenneth Williams - 1911 - 834 pàgines
...a master is answerable for every Ptich wrong of the servant or agent as is committed in the rourse of the service and for the master's benefit, though...express command or privity of the master be proved. See Odgers (Broom) on Common Law (1911). pp. 484, 485. This principle is fully set forth in the opinion... | |
 | 1912 - 768 pàgines
...non-suit. The plaintiff appealed, and, in directing a new trial, Mr. Justice Willes said: "The general rule is that the master is answerable for every such wrong...express command or privity of the master be proved." He goes on to cite instances, as where owners of ships have been held liable in trespass for the acts... | |
 | Edwin Charles Goddard - 1914 - 916 pàgines
...distinction can be drawn between the case of fraud and the case of any other wrong. The general rule is, that the master is answerable for every such wrong...express command or privity of the master be proved. The principle is acted upon every day in running-down cases. It has been applied also to direct trespass... | |
 | 1914 - 800 pàgines
...which the court consisted. And the principle as there enunciated was in these terms: "The general rule is that the master is answerable for every such wrong...agent as is committed in the course of the service and foe the master's benefit, though no express command or privity of the master be proved." Lord Justice... | |
| |
