Posted By Robert K Lewis Look at the contract - If the duty has not been assigned then it rests with the employing contractor so far as breaches of his own duties are concerned. You would need to establish that the causative factors were outside of what a competent contractor would know and thus could control. Most contracts exclude incompetence, thus if subcontractor acts incompetently there is no case against employing contractor for injury. However incompetence is extremely hard to prove. HSE view is generally to ask who is in control - ie who is the principal or employing contractor. Bob

Posted By CFT HB It could given the right circumstances; if however as you suggest the selection process was thorough what particular significant risk was the engaging contractor supposed to be undertaking that the sc had not already produced for the contractor; specifics of regulation 3 not withstanding? I ask as you started by asking about member experiences; I just want to be clear on what you are asking before wasting your time with an altogether incorrect reference to a 'similar' case I investigated some years ago. CFT

Posted By Halesowen Baggie CTF Any experience you could share would be welcomed.

Posted By toby liberson Just to get me up to speed on this: As I understand the post the sub-contractor is going to claim against the contractor for injuries sustain whilst working in a premises under the contractors control. If this is the case then where does a claim of vicarious liability come in? It is also not clear whether the sub-contractor was working to his method statement/SSOW or whether he was working in a way as specified by the contracor? Finaly what was the sub-contractors competence and what were th demands of the job , as an example a corgi registered fitter would have trouble claiming compensation for injuries sustained due to the malfunctioning of an appliance he had fitted