The repeal of Regulation 6 will expand liability for work accidents to include entrepreneurs, work orderers, and other parties.
Dec 29, 2022
By: Itzick Simon
Will responsibility for safety at work expand and apply far beyond the boundaries of the main contractor's jurisdiction ("the construction operation")? For about two years, the Ministry of Economy has been examining the formulation of new regulations that entail a real revolution. At the center of them is a dramatic expansion of the chain of responsibility for work accidents . Including a special spotlight on construction sites, which are unfortunately known to be prone to disasters.
The new regulations are reportedly in the final stages of drafting ahead of their passage by the next government. One of the key issues is the repeal of Regulation 6 of the Occupational Safety Regulations, which currently places full responsibility for complying with the obligations in the regulations on the main contractor.
In today's legal-harmful climate, prior to the repeal of Regulation 6, the main contractor is responsible for safety at the construction site. According to Regulation 6, if the client has assigned the execution of the construction work in full to a main contractor, the latter will be defined as the "construction operator" and " the duties imposed on the construction operator by these regulations are imposed on him ." It should be emphasized that the main contractor is also responsible for construction activities carried out by subcontractors employed by him.
If the person ordering the work is a "construction operator" (main contractor) by law, he is not liable for damages to victims in work accidents on the site (except in exceptional cases). If Regulation 6 is repealed, the person ordering the work will also be required to take responsibility and bear it.
According to the new regulations, the client will be obliged to take various measures, such as establishing a supervisory system and allocating resources. Similarly, the new regulations are also supposed to expand liability for accidents to other parties (such as landowners, project managers, execution engineers, etc.). A report prepared by the Ministry of Economy to examine the regulatory impacts of changing the regulations addressed this unequivocally:
" The existing regulation has created a kind of 'lightning rod' in the form of the construction manager/operator, and prevents the implementation of safety as a whole by failing to point the finger at other key role players, such as the construction developer (as the 'owner of the century'), the higher supervision carried out on his behalf, the project manager, the execution engineer, and more ."
By: Itzick Simon
Will responsibility for safety at work expand and apply far beyond the boundaries of the main contractor's jurisdiction ("the construction operation")? For about two years, the Ministry of Economy has been examining the formulation of new regulations that entail a real revolution. At the center of them is a dramatic expansion of the chain of responsibility for work accidents . Including a special spotlight on construction sites, which are unfortunately known to be prone to disasters.
The new regulations are reportedly in the final stages of drafting ahead of their passage by the next government. One of the key issues is the repeal of Regulation 6 of the Occupational Safety Regulations, which currently places full responsibility for complying with the obligations in the regulations on the main contractor.
In today's legal-harmful climate, prior to the repeal of Regulation 6, the main contractor is responsible for safety at the construction site. According to Regulation 6, if the client has assigned the execution of the construction work in full to a main contractor, the latter will be defined as the "construction operator" and " the duties imposed on the construction operator by these regulations are imposed on him ." It should be emphasized that the main contractor is also responsible for construction activities carried out by subcontractors employed by him.
If the person ordering the work is a "construction operator" (main contractor) by law, he is not liable for damages to victims in work accidents on the site (except in exceptional cases). If Regulation 6 is repealed, the person ordering the work will also be required to take responsibility and bear it.
According to the new regulations, the client will be obliged to take various measures, such as establishing a supervisory system and allocating resources. Similarly, the new regulations are also supposed to expand liability for accidents to other parties (such as landowners, project managers, execution engineers, etc.). A report prepared by the Ministry of Economy to examine the regulatory impacts of changing the regulations addressed this unequivocally:
" The existing regulation has created a kind of 'lightning rod' in the form of the construction manager/operator, and prevents the implementation of safety as a whole by failing to point the finger at other key role players, such as the construction developer (as the 'owner of the century'), the higher supervision carried out on his behalf, the project manager, the execution engineer, and more ."
Will the regulations complete what the ruling has already started?
It is important to note that already today, given the high number of work accidents in the construction industry and the fact that this is a "state coup", the courts in Israel have long begun to expand the limits of liability beyond the main contractors.
More and more cases end with the imposition of liability on work orderers. Often the legal solution is given on the basis of Section 15 of the Torts Ordinance, which can be used to determine that the work orderer is liable for damage in a work accident if one of the following conditions is met:
· The client was negligent in selecting the main contractor.
· The person commissioning the work interfered with the work in a way that caused damage or injury.
· The person commissioning the work is responsible for the accident by virtue of a specific law.
· The person ordering the work approved or permitted the act that caused the accident.
· The client entered into the contract illegally.
Expanding the expected responsibility towards those who order the work obviously requires not only increased attention from the developers, but also addressing the issue at the insurance level.
It is important to note that already today, given the high number of work accidents in the construction industry and the fact that this is a "state coup", the courts in Israel have long begun to expand the limits of liability beyond the main contractors.
More and more cases end with the imposition of liability on work orderers. Often the legal solution is given on the basis of Section 15 of the Torts Ordinance, which can be used to determine that the work orderer is liable for damage in a work accident if one of the following conditions is met:
· The client was negligent in selecting the main contractor.
· The person commissioning the work interfered with the work in a way that caused damage or injury.
· The person commissioning the work is responsible for the accident by virtue of a specific law.
· The person ordering the work approved or permitted the act that caused the accident.
· The client entered into the contract illegally.
Expanding the expected responsibility towards those who order the work obviously requires not only increased attention from the developers, but also addressing the issue at the insurance level.
Who provides the contractor's insurance?
There is no doubt that imposing responsibility on inviters and other parties will require entrepreneurs to control the quality and scope of insurance coverage.
Developers who previously preferred to place the responsibility for project insurance on the main contractor will have to re-evaluate their approach on this issue, as they will want to protect themselves in the best possible way.
For more information, it is recommended to read about contractor work insurance and also about contractor insurance .
There is no doubt that imposing responsibility on inviters and other parties will require entrepreneurs to control the quality and scope of insurance coverage.
Developers who previously preferred to place the responsibility for project insurance on the main contractor will have to re-evaluate their approach on this issue, as they will want to protect themselves in the best possible way.
For more information, it is recommended to read about contractor work insurance and also about contractor insurance .
מסמכים
