A hired welder, working on a 12-foot ladder, was sent plummeting to the ground after his machinery malfunctioned. The decision in Pereira v Yaya Foods Corporation, 2024 ONSC 6585, surveyed the legal fallout of that incident and serves as a fascinating lesson in occupiers’ liability, independent contractors, and determining who is actually responsible when things go south on a job site.
What Went Down (Literally)?
Jose Pereira (“Pereira“), a welder, was working at Yaya Foods Corporation’s (“Yaya Foods”) premises when he took an unexpected fall—straight to the ground. The culprit? A mini excavator whose claw attachment failed due to an extensive, yet seemingly undetected, hydraulic leak. The attachment was meant to hold a steel beam steady while Pereira cut it, but when it failed, the beam fell, knocking over Pereira’s ladder and sending him crashing to the ground. A subsequent investigation by the Ministry of Labour confirmed that the excavator had not been properly maintained.
Pereira was a subcontractor hired by Yes Services, a non-party to the action, to complete welding work at premises owned by Yaya Foods. He sued Yaya Foods, claiming that as the occupier of the premises, it had a duty to maintain a safe working environment, including ensuring that all on-site machinery was in good condition.
Yaya Foods filed for partial summary judgment, arguing that there was no basis upon which to find it liable as an occupier.
Pereira sought to rely on the decision in Botosh v Ottawa (City), 2013 ONSC 5418, where the court emphasized an occupier’s duty to actively ensure the safety of its premises. He argued that Yaya Foods had an obligation to take positive steps to ensure that its premises, and the structures therein, were properly maintained and inspected.
The Court, however, was not convinced, finding that the equipment failure was the responsibility of Pereira, the independent contractor, and not the occupier, Yaya Foods. Having determined that Yaya Foods did not have a duty to ensure the equipment was properly maintained, the Court concluded that there was no failure on its part as a result.
Partial summary judgement was granted in favour of Yaya Foods, and the claim against it was dismissed.
The Key Rung in the Liability Ladder:
This ruling is a cogent reminder that an assessment of occupiers’ liability claims requires a focus on what the occupier actually controls. While an occupier is responsible for keeping its premises safe, this duty does not necessarily extend to inspecting and maintaining a contractor’s machinery and tools.
See Pereira v. Yaya Foods Corporation, 2024 ONSC 6585 (CanLII), https://canlii.ca/t/k82xt
