Under which doctrine can a principal be held liable for the acts of an agent?

The correct answer relates to the doctrine of vicarious liability, which is essential in the context of agency law. Under this doctrine, a principal can be held liable for the actions of an agent when those actions occur within the scope of the agent's employment or authority. The rationale behind vicarious liability is that employers (principals) should bear the costs associated with the risks that arise from an employee's (agent's) work-related activities.

For example, if an agent is conducting business on behalf of the principal and causes harm to a third party while performing their job duties, the principal may be held liable for the agent's actions, as these actions are considered an extension of the principal's business activities. This principle promotes accountability and encourages principals to implement proper training, supervision, and safety measures for their agents.

The other options relate to distinct legal principles that do not directly pertain to the liability of a principal for the actions of an agent in the context of their agency relationship. The doctrine of strict liability focuses on holding a party liable regardless of fault in certain circumstances, while informed consent pertains more to issues of autonomy and consent in medical or legal contexts. The doctrine of respondeat superior is closely related to vicarious liability but specifically