Tort; vicarious liability; distinguishing employees and independent contractors.
Facts: As he was leaving a building where he had gone to pick up a parcel, Hollis was struck and injured by an unidentified courier on a bicycle. The courier was wearing a uniform issued by Vabu, a company that traded as Crisis Couriers. Hollis, whose knee was permanently damaged in the collision, claimed damages from Vabu for personal injury, alleging that the courier in question was not an independent contractor, but an employee of Vabu for whom Vabu was responsible in tort.
Issue: Was the courier an employee or an independent contractor?
Decision: The High Court held that the courier was an employee rather than an independent contractor.
Reason: The courier could not be regarded as running his own business or enterprise and, in addition, he had no real independence in conducting his operations. Factors which demonstrated this included: his lack of any special qualifications, his lack of control over how to perform his work, his lack of control over his working hours, his use of Vabu's uniforms and the method by which he was paid by Vabu. The court said (at [40]):
"In general, under contemporary Australian conditions, the conduct by the defendant of an enterprise in which persons are identified as representing that enterprise should carry an obligation to third persons to bear the cost of injury or damage to them which may fairly be said to be characteristic of the conduct of that enterprise."