Ontario Barrister and Solicitor Practice Exam 2025 - Free Barrister and Solicitor Practice Questions and Study Guide

A common defense against vicarious liability involves showing that the employer had no knowledge of the employee's conduct. This defense is rooted in the principle that an employer should not be held liable for the actions of an employee if the employer was unaware of those actions and had no reason to anticipate them.

In vicarious liability cases, the focus is on the relationship between the employer and employee and whether the employer should be held responsible for the employee's negligent or wrongful acts while performing duties related to their employment. If the employer can successfully demonstrate that they lacked knowledge of the employee's misconduct or that the actions were taken outside the scope of employment, it can mitigate or eliminate responsibility.

This differs from the other options presented. For instance, proving that the employee was on a break does not alone absolve the employer, as the liability often revolves around whether the actions occurred in the course of employment. Arguing that the employee was adequately trained is also not necessarily a defense against vicarious liability; training pertains more to the employer's negligence rather than liability for employee actions. The notion that the employee had consented to the behavior does not impact the employer's liability under vicarious liability frameworks, as consent may not negate the employer's responsibility for tort