An Example of Argumentation Scheme from Liability: The Case of Vicarious Liability

In this work, we explore a new argumentation pattern in legal discourse, referred to as the ‘Argument from Vicarious Liability.’ Central to our discussion is the ‘Respondeat Superior’ principle, commonly applied in Tort Law, which associates the accountability for an act with a supervisory figure, rather than the direct perpetrator. Our investigation highlights the need for more in-depth analysis of how liability functions within legal argumentation schemes. We introduce what we believe to be the first argumentation scheme focused explicitly on liability and its indirect ties with causality. While showing how this scheme is already used in some important judicial cases, we will also discuss how this specific argumentative pattern might be related to, or build upon, existing schemes in argumentation.