P contracted D to take pictures on the inside of X’s cinema and due to D’s negligence there was fire damage. CA held that P would be liable to X and therefore was entitled to recover for negligence from D.
Slesser LJ: General rule is that E is liable for acts of servants/agents but not for those of ICs. To determine whether a party is a servant or an IC, we look at whether E “retains control of the actual performance”, in which case it is a servant, or leaves the manner of performance to the party, in which case it is an IC. Is this case within the general rule or the “extra-hazardous” category? This case DID fall within the extra-hazardous category (it involved making explosions on the premises).
