Rmax Pty Ltd v Da Silva

Rmax Pty Ltd (the appellant) appealed to the New South Wales Court of Appeal against a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The dispute concerned the appellant's liability for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident in which the respondent, Mr. Da Silva, was injured. The primary issue was whether the appellant was vicariously liable for the negligence of its employee, who was driving a vehicle owned by the appellant at the time of the accident.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the driver of the appellant's vehicle was acting within the scope of his employment at the time of the collision. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the driver's use of the vehicle for a purpose that was not expressly authorised by the employer, but which was incidental to his employment, could still render the employer vicariously liable.

The Court of Appeal found that the driver was not acting within the scope of his employment at the time of the accident. Applying established principles of vicarious liability, the court held that while the employer owned the vehicle, the driver's unauthorised use of it for a personal purpose, even if it occurred during a period when he was generally on call, did not establish a sufficient connection to his employment to impose vicarious liability on the appellant. The court distinguished between acts that are authorised or incidental to employment and those that are purely personal deviations.

The appeal was dismissed.