Whether a premises owner owes a duty to an employee of an independent contractor.

In Jones v Daimler Chrysler Corporation, __ Mich __ (#140889, 2/4/2011) the Michigan Supreme Court re-affirmed that a premises owner does not have a duty to protect an employee of an independent contractor hired to perform construction work on the owner’s premises, from the hazardous condition that contributed to the plaintiff’s injury, where the defendant delegated to the contractor the task of performing the construction work. Banaszak v Northwest Airlines, Inc, 485 Mich 1034 (2010); Young v Delcor Assoc, 477 Mich 931 (2006). Moreover, even if premises liability had applied, the injured plaintiff could not have recovered where he was aware of the hazard, and indeed had ordered its creation. Riddle v McLouth Steel Products Corp, 440 Mich 86 (1992). An owner of property cannot be held liable under premises liability law for a design of the property that permits an invitee or person in control of the property to create a hazardous condition where none existed before.