The issue of Health and Safety at work has recently arisen again in the case of Kmiecic v. Isaacs.  At the time of the accident Kmiecic was carrying out work as a casual labourer for a building contractor on the roof of Isaacs.  He fell  from a ladder and sustained serious injuries.  The building contractor was uninsured and so Kmiecic commenced proceedings against Isaacs, as the occupier of the premises.  Kmiecic alleged that Isaacs had withdrawn her permission for him to access the roof through a bedroom window that had previously been allowed, and so he had used a ladder instead.  It was held that the building contractor was responsible for access and equipment, and Isaacs was found not to be at blame for the accident.
 
The initial decision in this case was that occupiers of premises where building work was being carried out were not liable for personal injuries sustained by a casual worker on the premises, as the occupier did not exercise control over access to or egress from the place of work for the purposes of the Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996 and the Work at Height Regulations 2005.
 
Kmiecic appealed against the decision that he was not entitled to compensation from Isaacs for injuries that he sustained whilst working.
 
The Court of Appeal held that whilst occupiers might have persons under their control who were not in their employment, in this case Kmiecic did not come under the control of Isaacs simply because Isaacs had previously allowed Kmeicic access through the window.  The principle remained that an occupier of premises who sought to limit access to or egress from did not incur an obligation.
 
The appeal was dismissed.