Law question can anyone help?

Question

I have been given a question "someone has asked an experienced joiner to repair some wooden stairs which were in a dilapidated condition. Whilst carrying out the repair the stairs collapsed on the joiner and he suffered serious injury. The joiner wants to know whether he can sue jack as the occupier of the property" Can anyone give me any cases which relate to this case?

I would like people to supply me with some example cases which relate to ENGLISH law only please.

Answer 1

Don't have the citations, but since the joiner knew the condition, look under Assumption of Risk.

Answer 2

DUTY of Care cases. (houseowner to joiner)
Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) AC 562, Lord Atkin

Duty, breach, causation.

Non volente ( joiner may have known the risk and voluntarily have surrendered his rights to complain)
What is usually meant by assumption of risk is more precisely termed primary assumption of risk. It occurs when the plaintiff has either expressly or impliedly relieved the defendant of the duty to mitigate or relieve the risk causing the injury from which the cause of action arises. It operates as a complete bar to liability on the theory that on assumption of risk, the duty of care passed to the plaintiff, and that without duty, there can be no negligence. However, primary assumption of risk is not a blanket exemption from liability for the operators of a dangerous activity. The specific risk causing the injury must have been known to and appreciated by the plaintiff in order for primary assumption of risk to apply.



Foreseeability of damage, i.e. that in the particular circumstances and not with the benefit of hindsight (per Roe v Minister of Health (1954) 2 AER 131), a hypothetical reasonable person would have foreseen damage (see Moran: 2003);
a relationship of "proximity" or "neighbourhood" between the parties, i.e. the Atkin's "neighbour" test; and
that it should be fair, just, and reasonable to impose a duty of a given scope upon the one party for the benefit of the other.


But also the householder could sue the joiner if it is reasonable to assume that he would have known the danger (being experienced) and was in breach of his DUTY of CARE and his NEGLIGENCE casued damage to the property??

Answer 3

This sounds like an essay question.

Define an occupier. S 1 (2) of the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 and Wheat v Lacon [1966] AC 552.

Define lawful vistor.

Also make a reference to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977

Next see s. 2(4)(a) of the 1957 Act.

Gwilliam v West Hartfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust [2002] EWCA Civ 1041. per Lord Wolf.

Look at OLA 1984.

Then apply the law.

This gets you started.

Good luck

Answer 4

I'm not really a legal eagle but would assume the joiner would have the same duty of care to himself as he would for another employee. had a case here in northern Ireland. a police officer while investigating a prowler in a elderly woman's garden slipped on ice in her back garden the police officer wanted to sue the elderly lady. after much debate and an already low confidence in the police service of northern Ireland the officer in question decided to drop the case. I WONDER WHY . me thinks he wouldn't have had a leg to stand on i think the same for the joiner in question he new the stairway was dodgy so he should have made sure he was safe while he worked on it. unfortunately in to days world we are only to willing to make others suffer because of our own stupidity and carelessness who is to Say that this builder/joiner didn't purposefully fall just so he could make a quick compensation claim.

Answer 5

It would be pretty bizarre to claim a tortious injury from the very defective condition one was hired to repair.

The only possible way to recover would be for a Plaintiff to claim his own incompetence to do the work, and that the Defendant knew or should have known he was unqualified. I doubt even that would work.

Answer 6

In the US, homeowner's insurance likely covers this. If the guy was not working off the books, he also has workman's comp.