Under which circumstance is an employer generally not liable for a tort committed by an employee?

An employer is generally not liable for a tort committed by an employee when the act was committed by an independent contractor. This principle is rooted in the legal doctrine of "respondeat superior," which holds that employers are responsible for the actions of their employees performed within the scope of their employment. However, this doctrine does not apply to independent contractors since they operate under their own direction and control.

When an independent contractor performs a task, they are not considered to be under the direct control of the employer, which limits the employer's liability for any wrongful acts committed in the course of that work. For example, if a company hires an independent contractor to undertake a specific job and that contractor engages in negligent behavior that results in harm, the company typically would not be held accountable.

In contrast, if the act is part of the employee's job description, the employer may be liable since the employee was performing duties as expected. Similarly, if the job is considered inherently dangerous, the employer may still face liability due to the nature of the work and the responsibility to ensure a safe work environment. If an employee acts willfully or intentionally harms someone outside the scope of their duties, liability can also shift away from the employer in that context.