Vicarious liability

Normally a person is not liable in criminal law for the acts of another.
Vicarious liability is an exception to this rule and can be regarded as a
form of constructive liability, as the act, and in some cases even the mens
rea, of another person are imputed to the defendant. When vicarious
liability applies, the accused’s conviction does not rest on anything done
or omitted by him, but on the acts and mental state of another. Vicarious
liability can therefore be distinguished from accessorial liability (see
Chapter 17) where the defendant is liable for helping someone else
commit a crime

Vicarious liability is a form of a strict, secondary liability that arises

under the common law doctrine of agency, respondeat superior, the
responsibility of the superior for the acts of their subordinate or, in a
broader sense, the responsibility of any third party that had the "right,
ability or duty to control" the activities of a violator. It can be
distinguished from contributory liability, another form of secondary
liability, which is rooted in the tort theory of enterprise liability because,
unlike contributory infringement, knowledge is not an element of
vicarious liability. The law has developed the view that some
relationships by their nature require the person who engages others to
accept responsibility for the wrongdoing of those others. The most
important such relationship for practical purposes is that of employer and
employee.[

For example, a chauffeur who uses his employer’s vehicle as a getaway

car for a robbery would be acting outside the scope of employment. Why
is there a need for vicarious liability? Why not merely prosecute the actor
himself? There are many different reasons for wishing to prosecute the
employer. The offence may be one which can only be committed by the
employer, as for example where he is the holder of a licence and the
offence is one which can only be committed by a licensee. It may also be
very difficult to prove fault on the part of the employer, so the actus reus
and mens rea of the employee are relied on. Or it may be that for policy
reasons the employer is regarded as the appropriate target