The study aimed to determine the effectiveness of legal mechanisms governing the subsidiary liability of employers for damages caused by employees in the course of their employment duties. The paper examined the theoretical foundations of tort law, judicial practice, and comparative approaches across different legal systems. The methodological framework was based on a comprehensive approach that combined doctrinal analysis, a comparative examination of common law and European law provisions, and case law analysis, including a review of specific cases. This approach made it possible to identify the peculiarities of interpretation and application of the relevant norms in various jurisdictions. The findings of the research demonstrated that subsidiary liability continues to play a key role within the system of tort law, as it ensures effective compensation for victims even in cases where the employee lacks sufficient financial resources. At the same time, it was established that legal systems vary in their definition of the employer’s scope of liability: while continental European jurisdictions tend to interpret it more broadly, common law countries are more inclined to apply restrictive criteria. The analysis of judicial practice revealed that courts increasingly favour the principles of fairness and proportionality, striving to protect victims while preventing excessive financial burdens on employers. The research also identified ambiguity in the qualification of employees’ intentional torts, which necessitates clarification of statutory criteria regarding the boundaries of “the course of employment”. The obtained results have practical implications: for legal practitioners, they assist in the proper legal qualification of duties and scope of liability, and for employers, they serve as guidance for implementing preventive strategies, including risk management, compliance programmes, and insurance mechanism
Licenji et al. (Thu,) studied this question.