Principle: An employer is liable for an injury caused to an employee in the course of the employment.
Facts: ‘A’ and ‘B’ were working in a factory as unskilled laborers. A was carrying a basket of stones on his head. B was sitting on the ground. When A crossed B, all of a sudden a stone fell down from the basket and hit B on his head. B died instantaneously.

Question

Where were the last Olympics games held ?

Answer 1

The deciding question is simply whether the accident happened in the course of employment, since that is the exact trigger the principle uses.

Employer will be liable: Both A and B were performing their regular work when the stone fell and killed B, placing the incident squarely in the course of employment, so the employer bears liability.
Employer will not be liable: Wrong, the accident occurred during ordinary work duties, exactly the situation the principle covers.
A will be liable: The principle fixes responsibility on the employer for such injuries, not on the individual co-worker performing routine work.
Both employer and A liable: Not supported, the rule as stated attaches liability to the employer alone in this scenario.

The correct answer is The employer will be liable.

Answer 2

Assuming each option true.

Employer will be liable: Assume true, then B's injury must have occurred during the course of his employment. It did, both A and B were performing their assigned factory work, carrying stones and sitting nearby, when the accident happened, matching the assumption.
Employer will not be liable: Assume true, then the accident must have happened outside the course of employment, during some personal or unrelated activity. Nothing in the facts supports that, both men were engaged in ordinary work duties, so the assumption doesn't fit.
A will be liable: Assume true, then the principle would need to attach liability to the individual co-worker rather than the employer for such an accident. The principle as stated speaks only to employer liability for injuries in the course of employment, leaving no room for this individual-liability assumption.
Both employer and A liable: Assume true, then the principle would need to provide for shared liability. It doesn't, it states a single rule attaching responsibility to the employer, so assuming a split outcome goes beyond the text.

Only the assumption of employer liability survives, since B's injury plainly occurred during the ordinary course of both men's employment.

Therefore, the correct answer is The employer will be liable.

Answer 3

Assuming each option true.

Employer will be liable: Assume true, then B's injury must have occurred during the course of his employment. It did, both A and B were performing their assigned factory work, carrying stones and sitting nearby, when the accident happened, matching the assumption.
Employer will not be liable: Assume true, then the accident must have happened outside the course of employment, during some personal or unrelated activity. Nothing in the facts supports that, both men were engaged in ordinary work duties, so the assumption doesn't fit.
A will be liable: Assume true, then the principle would need to attach liability to the individual co-worker rather than the employer for such an accident. The principle as stated speaks only to employer liability for injuries in the course of employment, leaving no room for this individual-liability assumption.
Both employer and A liable: Assume true, then the principle would need to provide for shared liability. It doesn't, it states a single rule attaching responsibility to the employer, so assuming a split outcome goes beyond the text.

Only the assumption of employer liability survives, since B's injury plainly occurred during the ordinary course of both men's employment.

Therefore, the correct answer is The employer will be liable.

Show Hint