Viljoen v Smith (47/95) [1996] ZASCA 105; 1997 (1) SA 309 (SCA); (1997) 18 ILJ 61 (A) (25 September 1996)

Viljoen v Smith (47/95) [1996] ZASCA 105; 1997 (1) SA 309 (SCA); (1997) 18 ILJ 61 (A) (25 September 1996)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the employee, Links, did cause the fire on the respondent's property and did so negligently. The court held that although Links left his immediate work area for a personal reason, the deviation was not so substantial in terms of distance or time as to remove him from the scope of his employment. The court applied the established principles of vicarious liability, finding that the employer remains liable where the employee's deviation is minor and the act occurs during the course of employment. The evidence showed that Links' conduct was consistent with what he was permitted to do on the employer's property, and the additional distance traversed did...

Citation
[1996] ZASCA 105
Parties
Appellant: Jacobus Johannes Viljoen; Respondent: Frederick Smith
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 September 1996
Case Number
47/95
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Cape of Good Hope Provincial Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.
Judges
Corbett, Hefer, F H Grosskopf, Howie, Plewman
Legal Topics
Vicarious Liability, Negligence, Scope of Employment
Delict Vicarious Liability Negligence Scope of Employment

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jacobus Johannes Viljoen

Appellant

Frederick Smith

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Cape of Good Hope Provincial Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the employee, Willem Links, caused the fire on the respondent's property.
  2. 2 Whether Links acted negligently in causing the fire.
  3. 3 Whether Links acted within the scope of his employment when causing the fire.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the employee, Links, did cause the fire on the respondent's property and did so negligently. The court held that although Links left his immediate work area for a personal reason, the deviation was not so substantial in terms of distance or time as to remove him from the scope of his employment. The court applied the established principles of vicarious liability, finding that the employer remains liable where the employee's deviation is minor and the act occurs during the course of employment. The evidence showed that Links' conduct was consistent with what he was permitted to do on the employer's property, and the additional distance traversed did...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The appellant is ordered to pay the respondent's costs, including the costs of two counsel.