Also known as: peculiar risks · peculiar risk doctrine
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A tort doctrine under which a party that hires an independent contractor to perform work the hirer should recognize as likely to create a peculiar risk of physical harm to others unless special precautions are taken remains subject to liability for harm caused by the contractor's failure to take those precautions. The doctrine imposes a nondelegable duty on the hirer to provide for the precautions either by contractual specification or other reasonable means. It applies even when the hirer selects a competent contractor and even when the contract purports to shift responsibility for safety measures.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Prism Analytics hired Penelope Price to demolish an old warehouse wall bordering a busy sidewalk. The contract addressed only price and completion date and contained no requirement for barricades, netting, or sidewalk closure. During the work bricks fell onto the sidewalk and injured a passerby. Prism Analytics faces liability under the peculiar risk doctrine because it failed to provide for the special precautions the demolition work required.
Pioneer Energy hired Pierce Patterson to perform inherently dangerous electrical work on its property. Patterson's own employee suffered injury when Patterson failed to take required safety measures. The employee sued Pioneer Energy under the peculiar risk doctrine. The claim fails because the doctrine does not extend to permit recovery by the contractor's own employees against the hiring party.
Yes. The doctrine imposes a nondelegable duty on the hirer regardless of the contractor's competence. The hirer's liability arises from its own failure to provide for special precautions, not from any fault in selecting the contractor.
Supporting sources
Peculiar risk requires a showing that the hirer failed to provide for special precautions against a risk that is peculiar to the work. Abnormally dangerous activity imposes strict liability without regard to negligence or precautions. The two doctrines are distinct even though both can produce vicarious liability for an independent contractor's conduct.
No. A general compliance clause does not satisfy the duty when the hirer knows the work poses a peculiar risk that requires specific precautions such as containment systems or barriers. The hirer must either mandate those precautions in the contract or otherwise ensure they are taken.
Supporting sources
No. The doctrine does not extend to permit recovery by the contractor's own employees against the hiring party. That limitation prevents the doctrine from undermining the workers' compensation bargain between the contractor and its employees.