Caution - the person commissioning the work can also be liable for a work accident (a worker falling from scaffolding)
Dec 30, 2018
By Attorneys John Geva and Shlomi Hadar
On September 25, 2018, an important ruling was issued by the Haifa District Court, addressing the liability of a contractor and the client for damages suffered by a worker who fell from scaffolding during his work. In addition to the contractor and the client, the worker sued Hachshara Insurance Company Ltd., which insured both defendants. The worker’s claim was joined by the National Insurance Institute (Bituach Leumi).
The facts were as follows: On March 15, 2015, the plaintiff was performing plastering work at the home of the client in Yokneam. At the end of the workday, the plaintiff attempted to descend from scaffolding installed at the site and fell approximately six meters to the ground, sustaining injuries.
The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the client and the contracting company that employed him, claiming that they had negligently breached statutory obligations regarding worker safety on construction sites.
The defendants, on the other hand, argued that the plaintiff was an experienced and seasoned worker, who had also worked as a self-employed contractor employing others. They claimed that the plaintiff was responsible for his own injuries, as he had improvised a route to descend from the second floor and failed to use the designated and safe descent route on the other side of the building.
By Attorney John Geva and Shlomi Hadar
On September 25, 2018, an important ruling was issued in the Haifa District Court, dealing with the liability of a contractor and the work orderer for damages caused to an employee who fell from scaffolding during his work. In addition to the contractor and the work orderer, the employee sued Kashgar Insurance Company Ltd., which insured the other two defendants. The National Insurance Institute joined the employee's claim.
And so it was: On March 15, 2015, the plaintiff was engaged in performing plastering work at the home of the client in Yokneam. At the end of the work day, the plaintiff asked to descend from scaffolding that was installed on the site and while descending, he fell from a height of approximately 6 meters to the ground and was injured.
The plaintiff sued the client and the contracting company that employed him, claiming that they were negligent towards him and violated statutory obligations regarding the safety of construction workers.
On the other hand, the defendants claimed that the plaintiff is a veteran and experienced worker who also worked independently and employed workers. They claim that the plaintiff is responsible for the damages he suffered because he altered a way to descend from the second floor and avoided using the descent that was prepared for that purpose on the other side of the building.
Court decision
At the end of the proceedings, the court found that the contracting company was negligent towards the worker because the scaffolding was erected negligently and that allowing a staircase used by workers to ascend and descend for work purposes without a railing constituted negligence, as it was possible and should have been expected that workers would have difficulty ascending and descending it and that they might deviate towards the yard and fall.
According to the court, there is "double and multiple liability" in a situation where the person descending the stairs is forced to bend under a low scaffold, sit down and slide down the stairs. The court added that no evidence was presented that the plaintiff had any other way to get down from the scaffold.
The court also found that the client cannot exempt itself from liability by contracting with a construction contractor . According to the court, a "reasonable" client who visits the construction site should and could have ensured that safety instructions are being followed and that appropriate safety measures are being taken to ensure the safety of the workers on the site. Similar to the ruling against the contracting company, the client should have foreseen the accident and was negligent in not taking measures to prevent the danger.
The court refrained from imposing any contributory fault on the employee and ultimately determined that the contracting company was responsible for 75% of the damages, while the client was only responsible for 25%.
It should be noted here that just a few days ago, on November 6, 2018, the General Workers' Confederation reached an agreement that will oblige the various government ministries to intervene and take measures to prevent work accidents on construction sites that have unfortunately become a national scourge. This includes, in connection with scaffolding, the Ministry of Labor will work to make the European standard mandatory for contractors on construction sites. This may reduce accidents, but as the case described above shows, the source of accidents is not failure to comply with standards but negligence, and since the result usually ends in death or disability, it is also a significant risk that clients, contractors, and contractors take on when performing contract work, with the solution usually being supervision and implementation of safety rules alongside insurance that covers against the expected risks.
מסמכים
