Are the doctrines of premises liability (traditionally landowner liability) and independent contractor liability (traditionally contractor liability) mutually exclusive such that a premises liability action is barred for the employee of a contractor who is injured while working on the business owner’s land?

This case is significant because it affords the Court the opportunity to clarify the relationship between theories of liability that are often interconnected. If the Court accepts the argument that premises liability is unavailable whenever independent contractor liability is triggered, landowners are potentially immune from liability for injuries to employees of contractors caused by dangerous conditions on their premises.