The law of delict relates to if a person has suffered some kind of loss due to the action of another person then they are entitled to be compensated for this. Scots Law surrounding delict details that there ought to be compensation for any loss which has been wrongfully caused. The historical routes from which this principle derived are that of Roman law and is known in Latin as damnum unjuria datum or ‘loss wrongfully caused’.
In other words it is required that one person has a duty of care to another person. It would however require to be proved that by the actions of one person it could be seen that this would result in harm being brought to the other person. This is not an easy thing to prove and each case is different and therefore each fact requires to be taken into account. There are many types of liability however for the purposes of this question I will be looking closely at vicarious liability.
Vicarious liability overall means that if one person has committed an act causing harm to them or another person then they alone are not necessarily held responsible for these actions. Vicarious liability can therefore be seen as an example of joint and several liability which can be applied to the person who has done something wrong but also to the person or company who is liable for that person’s actions. There are mainly three areas of this type of liability which is, for one, the relationship between an employer and their employee. Employers are vicariously liable, for acts of negligence which may be committed by their employee. Courts will sometimes distinguish between what is known as an employee's "detour" or "frolic". For example it would be seen that an employer would be held liable if it can be shown that a person employed by them had gone on a mere detour in carrying out their duties, whereas an employee acting in his or her own right rather than on the employer's business is undertaking a "frolic" and therefore the employer cannot be held...