contract-law property
Can a company sue the employee of another company on the basis of property right?
<p>To clarify the title:
let's say company ABC has entered into a contract with company XYZ, where it has ordered, and paid for a server farm. But 2 weeks before delivery an employee of XYZ destroys the server farm.</p>
<p>Can ABC sue the employee on the basis of infringement of a property right?</p>

<h2>In most common law jurisdictions, yes</h2>
<p>While the principal is <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicarious_liability" rel="nofollow noreferrer">vicariously liable</a> for the tortious acts and omissions of its agent; the agent is also liable in their own right. While it doesn’t happen often, it is possible for an aggrieved party to sue the agent (employee) rather than or as well as the principal (employer).</p>
<p>Note that vicarious liability does not apply to non-agents such as independent contractors (and here I mean real, actual independent contractors not employees who are called that so they or their employer or both can fiddle their tax) or employees <a href="https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=c24dbff1-5d9c-46d0-b070-b82444070c2f" rel="nofollow noreferrer">on a frolic</a>.</p>
<p>It is unusual for a number of reasons:</p>
<ul>
<li>where you have the option, it’s better to bring a case for breach of contract than in tort because you are entitled to more damages if you are successful. Damages for breach of contract restore you to the position you would have been in if the contract had been completed while tortious damages only restore you to the position you would be in if the tortious act had not happened.</li>
<li>the employer usually has more financial resources and insurance. If they do have insurance that would usually cover the agent as well.</li>
<li>it’s bad PR to pick on a lowly employee .</li>
<li>some jurisdictions (e.g. <a href="/questions/tagged/new-south-wales" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;new-south-wales&#39;" rel="tag">new-south-wales</a> prohibit it by statute.</li>
</ul>
