Kinsman v. Unocal Asbestos case: Discussion on the Privette Doctrine and Delegation

Read the discussion in the Kinsman v. Unocal asbestos case, where the Privette case is discussed in terms of delegation. A useful way to view the above cases is in terms of delegation.

As suggested by Privette, at common law, it was regarded as the norm that when a hirer delegated a task to an independent contractor, it in effect delegated responsibility for performing that task safely, and assignment of liability to the contractor followed that delegation.

For various policy reasons discussed in Privette, courts have severely limited the hirer’s ability to delegate responsibility and escape liability.

But in Privette and its progeny, we have concluded that, principally because of the availability of workers’ compensation, these policy reasons for limiting delegation do not apply to the hirer’s ability to delegate to an independent contractor the duty to provide the contractor’s employees with a safe working environment.

In fact, the policy in favor of delegation of responsibility and assignment of liability is so strong in this context that we have not allowed it to be circumvented on a negligent hiring theory.

Nonetheless, when the hirer does not fully delegate the task of providing a safe working environment, but in some manner actively participates in how the job is done, and that participation affirmatively contributes to the employee’s injury, the hirer may be liable in tort to the employee.

Courtesy of http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/archive/S118561.PDF

Other helpful links:

Asbestos Asbestos
Asbestos and lung cancer Asbestos and lung cancer
Mesothelioma attorney Mesothelioma attorney
Mesothelioma Lawyer Mesothelioma lawyer
Asbestos attorney Asbestos attorney