R was working as an accountant in a firm of solicitors. While acting in the ordinary course of business he committed fraud against a lady client B by fraudulently inducing her to sign documents transferring her property

Normally the tortfeasor is liable for his tort. But in some cases a person may be held liable for the tort committed by another. One such exception is when there exist a relationship of Principal and Agent [Specific authority]. According to the Law of Torts the principle applicable in the cases of specific authority between principal and agent is qui facit per alium facit per se which means he who acts through another is acting himself, so that the act of the agent is the act of the principal. When an agent commits a tort in the ordinary course of his duties as an agent, the principal is liable for the same. A master is vicariously liable for the tort of his servant, principal for the tort of his agent and partners for the tort of a partner. This is known as vicarious liability in tort. In the case of Lloyd v. Grace, Smith & Co. (1912) A.C. 716 , the managing clerk of a firm of solicitors, while acting in the ordinary course of business committed fraud, against a lady client by fraudulently inducing her to sign documents transferring her property to him. He had done so without the knowledge of his principal who was liable because the fraud was committed in the course of employment. In the given situation, where R was working as an accountant in a firm of solicitors, committed fraud against B by fraudulently inducing her to sign documents transferring her property to him. He did so while acting in the ordinary course of business without the knowledge of the principal Q. Therefore, the principal Q would be held liable as the fraud was committed in the course of employment.