Silverline Risk Management Case

Emma has suffered a serious facial injury & concussion as a result of a façade collapse, near a high-rise building constructed by Silverline. Because of this incidence, Emma was unable to work for 6 months. The legal issues arising from this incident fall under the tort of negligence. Silverline breached a duty of care owed to Emma when the façade collapsed and struck her. This breach led to severe injury and her loss of earnings. Emma should be reasonably compensated for this incidence [ ].
Silverline’s high-rise building should have been fit for purpose. Buildings present numerous risks during both construction and operational phases. Building regulations exist to minimise the risks that buildings present. Structures on buildings must
Emma was walking past the high rise as a member of the public. Any falling debris would likely affect those in near proximity of the building [ ].
The activity of the public and building operatives would have been assessed in the risk management profile of the high rise. Thus, Silverline should have been aware of any potential damage falling debris could cause to members of the public. It is reasonable to state that Silverline shouldn’t have put any member of the public at any risk of injury such as those suffered by Emma. Silverline owes the building users and the public a duty of care [ ].
Silverline had a responsibility to ensure all the structures of the high-rise were secure. Any insecure structure had the potential to become falling debris, and cause injury [ ]. The collapse of the façade was a violation of the building standard that Silverline must have adhered to. Any falling debris from the high rise could have reasonably been presumed to cause serious injury to anyone below the building [ ]. Emma would have fairly assumed that the high rise would not presented any unreasonable risk, such as falling debris. The building codes and health and safety practices of the construction industry consider the dangers that may be
When securing the façade, they did so to prevent it from falling. As construction professionals, they are aware the public’s safety is of paramount importance. The faulty fixing led to the façade collapse which inflicted Emma’s injuries [ ]. The faults in the fixings may have been the result of a manufacturing deficiency. If the fixings were not fit for purpose Silverline may not be liable for negligence. If Silverline used the fixings as intended and instructed by the manufacturers, then they would not be liable as Emma’s incidence is a result of a manufacturing fault. In this case, the fixings manufacturers would be liable due to the fault in their product. More information would need to be ascertained to establish whether Silverline or the fixings manufacturers are liable [