Facts
On March 1, 1997, the plaintiff [A.] went to the farm of the defendant [B.] to inspect a calf. There, [B.] induced [A.] to assist him in relocating a heavy log. During this activity, [A.] fell from a ladder and suffered serious injuries. [A.] subsequently filed a lawsuit against [B.] to seek compensation for damages and satisfaction. The lower instances dismissed the claim, as they did not see any contractual or non-contractual liability of the defendant. The Federal Supreme Court overturned the judgment and remanded the case for a new assessment.Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court concluded that the rule of Art. 422 para. 1 CO regarding the liability of the principal can be applied by analogy to gratuitous relationships without intent to create legal obligations. Accordingly, the plaintiff must be awarded damages at the court's discretion if the risk inherent in the dangerous activity has materialized. All relevant circumstances of the individual case must be taken into account, such as the nature of the interests at stake, the relationship between the values to be safeguarded by the activity and the recognizable risk, any potential…