No. 1454: Reply in from the Homeowners' Association, which clearly states that the City of Oslo is responsible even for demolishing and erecting a new wall as they have given us guidance to build on the old wall without having to search as I understand them!

No. 1454:
Reply in from the Homeowners' Association, which clearly states that the City of Oslo is responsible even for demolishing and erecting a new wall as they have given us guidance to build on the old wall without having to search as I understand them!

Here is the old wall, bad picture but it clearly shows that there was an old wall on which we built our "new" wall. Without applying, but in consultation with PBE.



Here I ask:

Thanks for the call, it was very clear to me.

I'm just a simple bus driver, so I need help with the law.

Try to write down everything you said to me with reference to paragraphs.

Have a nice day still!

Regards
Jan Kåre

This answer I got:

I'm referring to our phone call today. As I emphasized earlier and repeated over the phone, the case complex is of such scope and complexity that I have no opportunity within the free time to familiarize myself with this in a way that I can advise you on what to do.

When you stated that you wanted to claim the costs of demolishing the wall covered by the City of Oslo, I stated that Section 2-1 of the Compensation Damage Act regulates the employer's liability for employees' damaging actions in the performance of the service. Whether there is access to, and any grounds for claiming compensation from the municipality in this matter, I cannot decide.

If you are considering legal action against the municipality, the case should be thoroughly reviewed by a lawyer. As you are aware, you may have legal aid coverage included in your insurance policies, but this must be clarified with the insurance company.

The Compensation Act can be found at lovdata.no. Section 2-1 states:

§ 2-1. (Employer's responsibility for employee.)

1. Employer (67) is responsible (68) for injury (69) inflicted intentionally (70) or negligently (71) during employee (72) performance of work (73) or job (74) for employer, with (75) considerations be taken into consideration if the claims that the injured party can reasonably make to the business or service are breached. (76) Liability does not include damage that results from the employee going beyond what is reasonable to expect by the nature of the business or area of ​​business and the nature of the work or the job. (77)

2. By employer (78) is meant here the public (79) and any other (80) who has in his or her employment business (81). (82)

3. Employee (83) means anyone who does work or performs employment (84) in the employer's service, except for employment as an employee representative in another enterprise. (85) Equal to employee (86), agents in public service (87) are considered, those who serve in the Armed Forces and others under mandatory (88) public service, as well as inmates, patients, etc. who participates in work in the prison care facilities, in health care institutions, etc. (89)

4. If the patient injury compensation applies, the Patient Damage Act applies. (90)

As an HL member, you get one hour of free legal advice from a lawyer per. years, and this time is now used up. If you need further legal assistance in this matter, we have cooperation lawyers who can assist you. You can find an overview of these here:

https://www.huseierne.no/om-oss/radgivning/samarbeidsadvokater/

As a HL member, you get half an hour of free consultation, as well as a 20% discount on the attorney's usual fee.

Sincerely

Per Christian Nordal

Lawyer MNA
member Advisory

Final Comment:

According to what the Homeowners' Association says, we can cover everything regarding demolition and put up a new wall. Then if we win a new lawsuit against the City of Oslo.

Chapter 2. Responsibility of public and other employers, etc.
§ 2-1 (Employer's responsibility for employee.)

1. The employer is liable for damage that is intentionally or negligently caused during the employee's performance of work or duties for the employer, taking into account whether the claims that the injured party can reasonably impose on the business or service have been breached. The liability does not include damage that results from the employee going beyond what is reasonable to count on the nature of the business or area of ​​business and the nature of the work or the job.

2. By employer here is meant the public and anyone else who, in or out of business, has someone in their service.

3. Employee means any person who does work or performs duties in the employer's service, except for duties as a representative of another company. Equally with employees are agents in public activities, those who serve in the Armed Forces and others under mandatory public service, as well as inmates, patients, etc. who participates in work in the prison care facilities, in health care institutions, etc.

4. If the patient injury compensation applies, the Patient Damage Act applies.
0 Amended by Laws 13 June 1997 No. 44 (IKR 1 Jan 1999 pursuant to Res. 17 July 1998 No. 615), 15 June 2001 No. 53 (IKR 1 Jan 2003 for the Public Health Service pursuant to Res. 20 Dec 2002 No. 1623), June 20, 2003 No. 45 (Ikr. July 1, 2003, according to Res. June 20, 2003, No. 712), Aug. 12, 2016, No. 77 (Ikr. July 1, 2017, according to Res. June 16, 2017, no. 778).
§ 2-2 (Relief of the employer's responsibility
r.)

1. The employer's responsibility may be eased pursuant to § 5-2.

2. The liability may also be alleviated if the damage is due to a decision by the public authority and the injured party has for no reasonable reason failed to attempt to amend the decision.
0 Amended by Laws Feb 13, 1976 No. 1, June 21, 1985 No. 81.
§ 2-3 (easing the employee's responsibility.)

1. Anyone who has become liable for an employee under section 2-1 may claim him as far as is reasonable in view of the behavior, financial ability, the employee's position and other conditions.

2. The employee's liability to the injured party may be alleviated when circumstances as mentioned in paragraph 1 make it reasonable, and it is justified even with regard to the injured party. Employees who themselves are liable for damages may claim back what the employer should bear after paragraph 1.

3. The rule in paragraph 1 shall apply mutatis mutandis if the employer makes a claim against an employee who in his service has caused him injury.