Answer:- If the wife sustained injuries due to the negligence of her husband during the course of their employment at X, she may have grounds to seek legal recourse for her injuries. The specific legal options available to her will depend on the laws and regulations in the jurisdiction where the incident occurred, as well as the specific circumstances of the case.
In most cases, the wife may be able to file a workers’ compensation claim with X’s insurance provider. Workers’ compensation is a type of insurance that provides benefits to employees who are injured or become ill due to their work. If the husband’s negligence caused the wife’s injuries, she may be entitled to receive compensation for medical expenses, lost wages, and other related expenses.
Also Read State the number of cases under which Prime Minister has to pay damages under Law of Torts
Also Read What is the meaning of independent liability in law of torts?
If the husband’s negligence was particularly egregious, the wife may also be able to pursue a personal injury lawsuit against her husband and/or X. This could allow her to seek additional damages beyond what is covered by workers’ compensation.
It is recommended that the wife consult with an experienced personal injury attorney in her jurisdiction to discuss her legal options and determine the best course of action. The attorney can review the specifics of the case, evaluate the strength of her claim, and provide guidance on the best way to proceed.
The facts of this problem are similar as given in the case of Brown Vs-Morgan. In this case ‘The plaintiff and her husband were employed by the defendant, who was the licensee of a public house, the husband was employed as manager of the house and the wife as his helper. Owing to the negligence of the manager (i.e., the husband) the helper (i.e., the wife) sustained injuries. She sued the defendant as the employer and the husband as the manager, and was awarded the damages, against the defendant. The defendant appealed contending that as the husband could not in law commit a tort against his wife and she should not sue him for negligence, and responsibility of the employer being a vicarious one, the action by wife against the employer cannot lie.”
Also Read Process of development of law of Torts in India
It was held that, “Since the passing of the Married Women’s Property Act, 1882, it was clear that a husband could be guilty of a tortious Act towards his wife although she could not sue him therefor, but the negligent act complained of having been done in the course of the husband’s employment, the claim of wife would lie, because the liability of the employer was based on the maxim, qui facit per alium facit perse. The fact, that a wife has right of action against her husband in respect of tortious act and negligence, does not mean that she has no right of action against her husband’s employer, if he when he did that negligent act, or made that negligent omission was acting within the scope of his employment. They remain liable, and there is no reason either in law or in common sense why they should be given an immunity which springs, in the case of husband and wife, from the fiction that they are one and form the desire that litigation between husband and wife shall no be encouraged.” Hence in this case wife can sue both employer and husband for damage.