for tortious acts of its employee D?
of authority relating to vicarious liability for intentional torts, as
exemplified by Morris, was of general
application and not restricted to bailment cases.
of sexual abuse were modes of doing an authorised act, but also whether there
existed a close connection between the tort and employee’s duties.
resident children and has entrusted that obligation to D.
with his employment that would be fair and just to hold HH vicariously liable.