5[1947]1,61.It was further said,at 13-14,that the question which of the two employers would be liable for the tort of the borrowed servant was not determined by any agreement between them.
6J.N.Adams and R.Brownsword,' Double Indemnity-Contractual Indemnity Clauses Revisited'[1988] JBL146,149.
7Bhoomidas v.Port of Singapore Authority[1978]I All ER956,960.
8Strait v.Hale Constr.Co.,26 Cal.Ap.3d941,103Cal.Rptr.487(1972) and for further references to US views,seeJ.A.Henderson and R.N.Pearson,The Torts Process(1981),177-9; and for an analysis of the parallel problem I UK labour law,see S.Deakin,'The Changing Concept of the "Employer" in Labour Law' (2001)30 Industrial LJ72.转引自 Simon Deakin、Angus Johnston、Basil Markesinis:TORT LAW,oxford University Press2003 Fifth edition,page580.
9Atiyah,p 150.《美国代理法诠释》Restatement of Agency,2d Vol 1,p.499.
