against an employer, the employer will be held liable if the entrustee's record was known, or would have been easily discoverable, to the employer. For example, if a bus company hires a driver who has a record of reckless driving, of which the company could have learned through a search of publicly available records, the company would be liable for the negligent entrustment of the bus to that driver, should the driver cause an accident. Negligent entrustment differs from negligent hiring, retention, supervision, and training in two key respects. First, negligent hiring and the related torts require the employment itself of the tortfeasor causing the injury, whereas a party can be held liable for negligent entrustment to any person. Second, an employer can be found liable for negligent hiring even without provision of any dangerous instrument to the employee. However, where an employer hires an unqualified person to engage in the use of a dangerous instrumentality, as in the above example with the bus driver, the employer may be liable for both negligent entrustment and hiring. Vicarious liability Vicarious liability is a separate theory of liability, which provides that an employer is liable for the torts of an employee under an agency theory, even if the employer did nothing wrong. The principle is that the acts of an agent of the company are assumed, by law, to be the acts of the company itself, provided the tortfeasor was acting within the course of his employment. By contrast, each of the above negligence theories requires proof of actual negligence on part of the employer before the injury occurred, for example when the employee was first hired. Notes and references Law of negligence Labour law