LEGAL PRINCIPLE: TORT LAW – Vicarious Liability – Presumption Is Rebuttable and Onus Lies on Owner
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The onus lies on the vehicle owner to dislodge the presumption of law that the driver drove the vehicle as the servant or agent of the owner.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Eseigbe v. Agholor (1993) NLC-2671991(SC) at pp. 35–36; Paras D–A.
"In the circumstances of this case, the onus was on the 2nd respondent to dislodge the presumption of law that operated against him to the effect that the 1st respondent drove the vehicle in issue as the servant or agent of the said 2nd respondent."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Once vehicle ownership is proved, a presumption arises that the driver acted as the owner’s servant or agent, establishing vicarious liability. This presumption is rebuttable, but the burden shifts to the owner to disprove it. The owner must adduce evidence showing: the vehicle was stolen, borrowed without permission, the driver was an independent contractor, or other circumstances negating employment/agency. Mere assertion is insufficient—evidence is required. The presumption reflects the policy that owners control who drives their vehicles and should bear responsibility unless they prove otherwise. This burden allocation protects injured parties while allowing owners to exculpate themselves through proof.