The favoured approach is not to apply one single test but to use an ‘economic reality, composite’ test, sometimes referred to as the ‘multiple factors’ test. In [ case ], the court had to consider the status of X who drove a concrete mixer. X was responsible for hiring, insuring and running the lorry and was paid by the company on the basis of his mileage. The company exercised control over uniform and colours of the lorry, but, despite this, the court held the driver to be an independent contractor.
Answer
Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions [1968] 2 QB 497
Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
The favoured approach is not to apply one single test but to use an ‘economic reality, composite’ test, sometimes referred to as the ‘multiple factors’ test. In [ case ], the court had to consider the status of X who drove a concrete mixer. X was responsible for hiring, insuring and running the lorry and was paid by the company on the basis of his mileage. The company exercised control over uniform and colours of the lorry, but, despite this, the court held the driver to be an independent contractor.
Answer
?
Tags
#law #negligence #tort #vicarious-liability
Question
The favoured approach is not to apply one single test but to use an ‘economic reality, composite’ test, sometimes referred to as the ‘multiple factors’ test. In [ case ], the court had to consider the status of X who drove a concrete mixer. X was responsible for hiring, insuring and running the lorry and was paid by the company on the basis of his mileage. The company exercised control over uniform and colours of the lorry, but, despite this, the court held the driver to be an independent contractor.
Answer
Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions [1968] 2 QB 497
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it The favoured approach is not to apply one single test but to use an ‘economic reality, composite’ test, sometimes referred to as the ‘multiple factors’ test. In Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions [1968] 2 QB 497, the court had to consider the status of X who drove a concrete mixer. X was responsible for hiring, insuring and running the lorry and was paid by the company on the basis of his milea
Original toplevel document (pdf)
cannot see any pdfs
Summary
status
not learned
measured difficulty
37% [default]
last interval [days]
repetition number in this series
0
memorised on
scheduled repetition
scheduled repetition interval
last repetition or drill
Details
No repetitions
Discussion
Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.