What is the ethical basis for imposing vicarious liability on a principal for an agent's tort?

The ethical basis for imposing vicarious liability on a principal is when the end mistake lies on the principal and not the agent. So if the principal fails to train the agent correctly or fails to supervise the agent correctly, it falls on the principal, not the agent. It can also fall on the principal if the principal gave faulty instructions or if the principal negligently hired the agent.

Can you find any examples of where this has occurred?

This happens all the time in restaurants. Especially when there is a new employee. On their first day, if their supervisor is supposed to be overseeing them and training them and giving them direction, but things get busy and the supervisor is called somewhere else, and that employee makes a mistake, it is not on the employee. It is on the supervisor.

Should there be situations when a principal should not be liable for the actions of the agent?

There should definitely be situations when the principal should not be liable for the actions of the agent. Any time that the agent fails to do what they are asked when the principal gives them a fair direction, the principal is supervising them, and any time that the agent is performing the job.

please read the statement above and only response with your opinion in regards to the statement above.