Abstract
LL.M. (Banking Law)
When a bank employee commits fraudulent acts within the course and scope of his employment, he renders the bank vicariously liable for his fraud. The logical conundrum is that since a bank never employs someone to commit fraud, and since fraud is thus never in this sense within the course and scope of his employment, should the bank never be liable for this fraudulent conduct? If this were the law, the public could potentially be defrauded with impunity, because those defrauded would be left only with a claim against a fraudster who likely has no assets. This dissertation examines the common-law doctrine of vicarious liability and illustrates the sometimes-haphazard manner in which courts have applied the underlying principle to the varying facts that arise. It will be shown that the application of the doctrine to cases involving fraud by bank employees is particularly inconsistent and unsatisfactory. It will be proposed that the solution lies in the development of the common law so as to promote the spirit, purport and objects of the Bill of Rights, and particularly section 25 of the Constitution. 2
This paragraph conceptualises the vicarious liability doctrine. Paragraph 2 considers the application of the doctrine by the courts, and points to inconsistencies in approach. The third paragraph deals briefly with the position in two common-law jurisdictions, Canada and Britain. The final paragraph proposes a solution to the observed inconsistencies: an employee acts in the course and scope of his employment for purposes of imposing vicarious liability when the employer’s right not to be arbitrarily deprived of his property in terms of section 25 of the Constitution is acknowledged, and his vicarious liability is limited to cases where there is a rational relationship between the employee’s fraudulent conduct and the scope of his employment, and not an arbitrary deprivation. In considering the South African cases, it readily becomes apparent that the courts have already instinctively adopted the approach of examining the nature and extent of the deviation by the employee from the scope of his employment, but have not done so in the context of the property clause ...