I'm trying to clarify when liability passes from one person to the next.
Lets take a residential property for example, which is what my question is based on. Is it black and white of 50 shades of grey!
If a person is injured on your property (as owner) you are potentially liable.
But who that person is and what they are doing on the property can make a difference - I assume.
Scenarios:
1. Good neighbour dropping off some biscuits and trips over branches you have trimmed from a tree and sitting in your front yard - you are liable as owner and home insurance should cover (broad statement).
2. Good neighbour dropping off some biscuits and trips over branches John Smith the gardener (operating a business) has trimmed from a tree and sitting in your front yard - I assume John Smith would be liable as he is operating a business and should have insurance.
Now it gets a bit murky:
3. Good neighbour dropping off some biscuits and trips over branches Paddy O'Toole has trimmed from a tree and sitting in your front yard - you got him off Gumtree for $25 /h (either you advertised for someone or answered his add wanting work .....not sure if it makes any difference). Paddy does odd jobs like many for some extra cash but is not operating a business, but does it on a semi regular basis - lets say a one off for you.
(a) Who is liable for injury to neighbour.
(b) What if Paddy himself is injured - falls out of the tree.
4. Good neighbour dropping off some biscuits and trips over branches Nathan Cashington has trimmed from a tree and sitting in your front yard - you have entered into JV with him to tidy up your property and do some "minor" painting and repairs in return for a share of the increase in value at sale time. Nathan has done this sort of thing a few times but is not operating a business as such. He does not get paid for work done, only a portion of the sale price and reimbursement of expenses etc as agreed.
(a) Who is liable for injury to neighbour. This is where it might get really muddy! If Nathan is not charging for work done in the normal way, would he be considered just helping the owner and therefore owner is liable as owner of the property.
(b) If liability balances "helping the owner," would it make any difference whether Nathan was doing all the work or just some of the work. If owners direct and physical involvement was required to satisfy definition of Nathan just helping, could this be satisfied by owner trimming a couple of branches, applying a few strokes of paint, hammering in a few nails etc ...even if a 1/99 split of work.
What say the jury!
Lets take a residential property for example, which is what my question is based on. Is it black and white of 50 shades of grey!
If a person is injured on your property (as owner) you are potentially liable.
But who that person is and what they are doing on the property can make a difference - I assume.
Scenarios:
1. Good neighbour dropping off some biscuits and trips over branches you have trimmed from a tree and sitting in your front yard - you are liable as owner and home insurance should cover (broad statement).
2. Good neighbour dropping off some biscuits and trips over branches John Smith the gardener (operating a business) has trimmed from a tree and sitting in your front yard - I assume John Smith would be liable as he is operating a business and should have insurance.
Now it gets a bit murky:
3. Good neighbour dropping off some biscuits and trips over branches Paddy O'Toole has trimmed from a tree and sitting in your front yard - you got him off Gumtree for $25 /h (either you advertised for someone or answered his add wanting work .....not sure if it makes any difference). Paddy does odd jobs like many for some extra cash but is not operating a business, but does it on a semi regular basis - lets say a one off for you.
(a) Who is liable for injury to neighbour.
(b) What if Paddy himself is injured - falls out of the tree.
4. Good neighbour dropping off some biscuits and trips over branches Nathan Cashington has trimmed from a tree and sitting in your front yard - you have entered into JV with him to tidy up your property and do some "minor" painting and repairs in return for a share of the increase in value at sale time. Nathan has done this sort of thing a few times but is not operating a business as such. He does not get paid for work done, only a portion of the sale price and reimbursement of expenses etc as agreed.
(a) Who is liable for injury to neighbour. This is where it might get really muddy! If Nathan is not charging for work done in the normal way, would he be considered just helping the owner and therefore owner is liable as owner of the property.
(b) If liability balances "helping the owner," would it make any difference whether Nathan was doing all the work or just some of the work. If owners direct and physical involvement was required to satisfy definition of Nathan just helping, could this be satisfied by owner trimming a couple of branches, applying a few strokes of paint, hammering in a few nails etc ...even if a 1/99 split of work.
What say the jury!
