#1: mehecskeeee - aláírás

Semmilyen mutogatas nem lehet vedekezes eroszakra, foleg nem egy kozfeladatot ellato szemelytol, remelem a nonek lesz annyi esze hogy nem a csoro villasvezetot hanem a BKK-t perli,
lasd alabb a jogi felelosseget Nyugaton.
Job-Related Accidents or Misconduct

Under a legal doctrine sometimes referred to as "respondeat superior" (Latin for "Let the superior answer"), an employer is legally responsible for the actions of its employees. However, this rule applies only if the employee is acting within the course and scope of employment. In other words, the employer will generally be liable if the employee was doing his or her job, carrying out company business, or otherwise acting on the employer's behalf when the incident took place.

The purpose of this rule is fairly simple: to hold employers responsible for the costs of doing business, including the costs of employee carelessness or misconduct. If the injury caused by the employee is simply one of the risks of the business, the employer will have to bear the responsibility.

But if the employee acted independently or purely out of personal motives, the employer might not be liable. Here are a few examples to illustrate the difference:

A restaurant promises delivery in 30 minutes "or your next order is free." If a delivery person hits a pedestrian while driving frantically to beat the deadline, the company will probably be legally responsible for the pedestrian's injuries.
A technology services company gives its sales staff company cars to make sales calls. After work hours, a sales person hits a pedestrian while using the company car to do personal errands. Most likely, the company will not be held responsible for the incident.
A law firm issues cell phones to all of its lawyers, to allow them to call into the office and check in with clients when they are on the road. A lawyer, driving, hits a pedestrian because she is completely engrossed in her telephone conversation with a senior partner in the firm. The law firm will probably have to pony up for the pedestrian's injuries.
A medical billing company hires a fumigator, who sprays the company's office with powerful pesticides. The next day, a dozen employees fall ill from the fumes. One of the affected employees is sent home; on her way, she suffers a dizzy spell and hits a pedestrian. The company is probably on the hook.

If you are sued under this legal theory of respondeat superior, your employee's victim generally won't have to show that you should have known your employee might cause harm, or even that you did anything demonstrably wrong. If your employee caused the injury while acting within the scope of employment, you will have to answer to the victim.

#4: HelloKitty - Re: aláírás

Életem! Egy normális ember így reagál akkor, ha először beszaratják, és gyilkosnak hiszi magát, majd a  vélt áldozat kiröhögi és megalázza abban a felfokozott rémült idegállapotban. Ez a luvnya többet nem lép a villamos elé, abban biztos vagyok, ha több haszna nem is, hát legalább ennyi lesz annak a pofonnak.

#4: HelloKitty - Re: aláírás Az ilyen pénzéhes haszonleső nyomorékokat kéne perelni,mint te.

#4: HelloKitty - Re: aláírás

Ha a BKK-t vagy BKV-t sikeresen perli a "hölgy", akkor azt ráfogják terhelni a járművezetőre,
amit munka nélküliként fizethet valahogy élete végéig... Rámegy majd a háza és a vagyona.

... fantasztikus ötlet.
Más országban lehet, hogy a nőt is be lehetne perelni, olyan traumát okozott, az életveszélyes
helyzet előidézésével, amit képtelen feldolgozni a j.vez (bár ezt kétlem, hiszen ez szinte mindennapos eset).