Respondeat superior

Respondeat superior means let the superior answer. It states the basis of vicarious liability in the law of torts: an employer is liable for a tort committed by his employee in the course of employment, though the employer did not himself commit or authorise the particular wrong. It is closely linked with the maxim qui facit per alium facit per se, he who acts through another acts himself. The employee remains personally liable, and the two are liable jointly.

Two conditions must be met. First, there must be a relationship of master and servant, as distinct from an employer and independent contractor; the traditional test is control over the manner of work, though courts now look at the whole relationship. An employer is not generally liable for the torts of an independent contractor. Second, the wrong must be committed in the course of employment, which includes an authorised act done in a wrongful or unauthorised manner, but not an act done on a frolic of the servant's own.

Indian statutes apply the same idea in particular settings. Section 26 of the Partnership Act makes a firm liable for the wrongful act or omission of a partner acting in the ordinary course of the firm's business or with the authority of his partners. Section 238 of the Contract Act makes misrepresentations made and frauds committed by agents acting in the course of their business affect agreements as if the principal had made them.

The liability of the State for the torts of its servants is governed by Article 300 of the Constitution, which links it to the liability of the Government before the Constitution. Courts have traditionally excluded acts done in exercise of sovereign functions, a line that has narrowed considerably, and constitutional courts also award compensation in public law for violation of fundamental rights. Examiners test the meaning of the maxim and the course of employment rule.