Principalansvaret i en modern kontext : Vem ansvarar för misslyckade gig?

Sammanfattning: The gig economy has made it possible for individuals to capitalize on the surplus value in a product or their spare time. However, the companies who operate in the gig economy see themselves as tech companies and state that they only provide an intermediary platform where a customer and a gig worker can meet. Other than that, they don’t assume any responsibility for the performance of the service. This position is also possible to discern in the companies terms of service, who the customer needs to accept to be able to use the platform.                        Tort law states a vicarious liability in general for the employees of the company. However, this raises the question regarding who is to be seen as a worker.  Therefore, the purpose of this thesis is to place the gig economy in the context of traditional tort law. As this is a new societal phenomenon, it is of interest to further analyze the socio-economic consequences of the result.                        To fulfill the purpose, the thesis applies the accepted legal sources, namely, legislation and its legislative history, court practice and literature of jurisprudence. The legislation does not define the term worker, therefore other legal sources need to be applied. Necessary material from doctrine and practice is also used in the description of whether contractual clauses can be adjusted. This material then forms the basis for a concrete application of the law. Based on this result, a legal economic perspective is then applied to answer whether the current legal situation entails an effective cost distribution in society.                       Gig work as such is not a uniform type of work but consists of two different categories that are also sorted into sub-categories that also differ depending on the platform. However, the vicarious liability should be possible to apply in all cases. What has mainly led to that conclusion is that the financial reasons behind the vicarious liability must have a material effect.                          In two cases vicarious liability has not been applicable due to the effect of the companies terms of service. In the first case since the cost of damage is likely to be of a low value. Therefore, no intervening effect occurs. In the second case, compensation is already paid to the injured party as in these cases there is a requirement that the gig worker has valid insurance.                       The gig economy consists of various possibilities for the principal to monitor the work. This creates an incentive for the gig worker to exercise the necessary caution as otherwise he or she risks losing his job. Thus, an overall economic efficiency arises in society as the platform can internalize this cost within the company instead of placing it on the injured party hence the worker assumes to be insolvent under a rule of personal liability. Surprisingly, the companies in those cases where a rule of personal liability occurs are also the ones who take the most measures to prevent injury. However, the worker assumes to demand to be compensated for the risks that he or she undertakes. Therefore, the cost of production increase and economic welfare decline as a result as the companies needs to charge higher prices.