Liability of the contractor - Work contract

The contractor is liable for any damages caused to the property, adjacent properties, or their components (e.g., plants) only in cases of gross negligence or intent. How is this liability regulated in your contracts for work? Similar? What does this provision "only in cases of gross..." actually mean? Does this provision also apply to the subcontractors? Feel free to answer by private message if legal advice cannot be excluded. :) Yvonne thanks you for your answers

Let's break it down:

1. In contract work law, the contractor is called "Unternehmer" and the client "Besteller."
2. Negligence describes an action taken in disregard of the usual standard of care in traffic (action = doing or omitting).
3. The "usual" standard of care is measured by what a reasonable and normally thinking person would normally expect regarding the action. If one deviates slightly from this, it would be "slight" negligence. Gross negligence is characterized by the fact that the disregard of care should not have happened here. Example: You knew the fence was there, could have seen it, but didn’t want to turn around while reversing with the wheel loader because the pretty blonde was watching in front, and turning around would somehow look uncool. ;)

Limiting liability to gross negligence and intent (knowing + wanting) is absolutely common. Liability for mere slight negligence is regularly excluded because otherwise liability would arise from the smallest mistakes.

Questions answered?


Uh, no. Subs: A contractual relationship exists only between you and the general contractor / main contractor. They contract with the subs. If the subs mess up, the general contractor / main contractor is liable. Thus, they are only liable within the scope of the liability agreement made with the client, if there is one (for example, here).

Thank you Volker,

I was hoping for a response from you :)
... and it reassures me when you write that this wording is common.

But I am still confused :confused: or somewhat at a loss: What about liability for damages caused despite being careful?

You have to live with such damages. Normally, these damages are financially rather negligible in concrete damage scenarios. Exactly for this reason, the perpetrator will generally (for moral reasons) repair the damage here. However, they are not obliged to do so. According to the agreement, you would bear the costs for damages caused by slight negligence.

The degree of negligence is often the point of dispute. The boundaries are fluid here and by no means clear-cut. I would also not want to be liable for slight negligence and would exclude this risk or not accept an assignment at all.