Which competent inspection is required before a scaffold is used, when weather or interruptions trigger a repeat check and when records must be kept.
BRANDAUER Rechtsanwälte
Salzburg law firm for real estate, construction and corporate law
Every matter is handled by a coordinated team of lawyers, legal staff and specialists. In construction cases we look at contract, evidence, deadlines and commercial consequences together.
A construction company often takes over a scaffold erected by another company. Before anyone uses it, the parties must distinguish the inspection carried out by the scaffold erector from the inspection required of the scaffold user.
Section 61 of the Austrian Construction Work Protection Ordinance, BauV, separates these responsibilities. After completion, a competent person of the scaffold erector must inspect the scaffold. Before first use, a competent person of the scaffold user must inspect it for obvious defects. Further inspections apply to specific scaffold types and events.
This article explains the statutory inspection events, the two roles and the documentation that matters in practice. A scaffold handover does not by itself amount to contractual acceptance and does not replace the assessment of other construction-site risks.
Answer a few short questions about your role and the event. You will receive an initial orientation on first-use, repeat inspections and records.
Already know you want to get in touch? Go straight to the enquiry form.
The BauV distinguishes between the scaffold erector and the scaffold user.
Assign the inspection of the completed scaffold to a person who is competent for the scaffold erector. Pass the relevant information to the future user and make the condition of the scaffold traceable.
This inspection does not replace the scaffold user’s own inspection before first use.
Arrange the inspection before the first access to the scaffold. Section 61(2) BauV focuses on obvious defects. If such a defect is found, use should stop until safe further work has been clarified.
Record the scaffold area, the event, the competent person and any deviations. If there is a fall hazard under section 7(2)(2) or (4) BauV, records of the inspections must be kept.
A longer work interruption, a storm, heavy rain, frost or another period of bad weather creates a new inspection event. A system scaffold must also be checked at least monthly and any other scaffold at least weekly for obvious defects.
The intervals do not replace an event-based inspection. Record the event and the result separately so that the decision to resume work remains traceable.
Assign the daily inspection of the suspension structure to a competent person and carry it out before work begins. This additional rule concerns the suspension structure and applies alongside the general inspections under section 61 BauV.
If a defect is found, use should stop until the issue has been assessed and, where necessary, remedied. Record the scaffold, date, person and result so the daily inspection can be allocated to a specific scaffold.
After completion, the scaffold must be inspected by a competent person of the scaffold erector. This inspection concerns the completed condition and provides the technical starting point for handing the scaffold to the later user.
A separate inspection is required before first use. It is carried out by a competent person of the scaffold user and is directed at obvious defects under section 61(2) BauV. A general handover statement cannot replace these two distinct steps.
The user should therefore keep the erector inspection and the user inspection separate. The records should show which step took place, when it took place and which competent person carried it out.
Work should not start merely because the scaffold is accessible. Before first use, the competent person of the scaffold user must check whether obvious defects can be identified. The statutory wording describes a check for obvious defects rather than a complete new structural design review.
For the practical handover, the scaffold area, access points, platforms, visible protective equipment and visible changes should be considered together with the intended work. Any deviation should be recorded with its location, time and response.
The inspection relates to the condition before use. Contract questions about responsibility, maintenance or a separate acceptance procedure must be assessed independently from the relevant agreements.
Section 61(2) BauV lists several events requiring another check for obvious defects: a longer work interruption, a storm, heavy rain, frost or another period of bad weather. Work should resume only after this event-based inspection.
There are also minimum intervals according to scaffold type. A system scaffold must be checked at least once a month and any other scaffold at least once a week. These minimum intervals do not remove the need for an additional check after a specific event.
The records should therefore distinguish an event-based inspection from a regular interval inspection. A single general date may otherwise fail to show whether the reason was a storm, an interruption or the regular interval.
For suspended scaffolds, section 61(3) BauV requires an additional daily inspection of the suspension structure by a competent person before work begins. This rule concerns a specific part of the scaffold and has its own daily timing.
The daily suspension-structure check does not replace the completion inspection or the user inspection before first use. The event-based inspections after interruption or bad weather and the general minimum intervals remain relevant as well.
The handover record should expressly identify a suspended scaffold. The daily entries should be capable of being linked to the scaffold, the date, the competent person and the result.
Section 61(5) BauV requires records of the inspections under paragraphs 1 to 3 where a fall hazard under section 7(2)(2) or (4) exists. The documentation duty therefore depends on a specific fall hazard and not solely on the fact that a scaffold is present.
Section 7(2)(2) concerns workplaces, standing places and traffic routes at or above water or other substances where there is a risk of sinking. Section 7(2)(4) concerns other workplaces, standing places and traffic routes where the fall height exceeds 2.00 metres.
In practice, the records should identify the scaffold, the inspection date and time, the competent person, the event and whether obvious defects were found. These details structure the evidence but do not remove the need to assess the individual site.
Section 61 BauV regulates inspections for the protection of employees. It does not automatically determine ownership, cost allocation or the time at which a contractual service has been accepted.
The handover should therefore also record the scope and location of the scaffold, permitted use, the contact for defects, maintenance responsibilities and any changes. If the scaffold is altered, the changed condition must be assessed again by a competent person.
The scaffold inspection is separate from general construction-site coordination and traffic safety for members of the public. For the building owner’s duties under the BauKG, see the article on construction-site coordination. Where there are concerns about a concrete construction instruction, the contractor’s duty to warn may require separate assessment.
Important: A signed handover sheet does not automatically prove that every statutory inspection has been completed. The relevant factors are the role, inspection time, scaffold type, event, competent person and, where a fall hazard exists, the required records.
The overview separates the statutory inspection events by role and timing.
| Inspection step | Who inspects? | When and what is checked? |
|---|---|---|
| Completion Competent person of the scaffold erector | After completion of the scaffold | |
| First use Competent person of the scaffold user | Before first use, for obvious defects | |
| Repeat check Competent person of the scaffold user | After a longer interruption, bad weather and at the minimum interval | |
| Suspended scaffold Competent person | Additionally every day before work: suspension structure |
Where a fall hazard under section 7(2)(2) or (4) BauV exists, records of the inspections must be kept.
A clear sequence prevents the erector inspection from being confused with the user inspection.
No. The erector’s competent person inspects after completion. Before first use, a competent person of the scaffold user must also check for obvious defects.
Yes. Section 61(2) BauV names storms, heavy rain, frost and other periods of bad weather as events requiring another check for obvious defects. Further use should wait until that inspection has taken place.
A system scaffold must be checked at least monthly and any other scaffold at least weekly for obvious defects. These minimum intervals do not replace an additional check after a particular event.
The suspension structure must be inspected by a competent person every day before work starts. This daily inspection is additional to the general inspections under section 61 BauV.
Section 61(5) BauV requires records where a fall hazard under section 7(2)(2) or (4) exists. This includes, among other situations, a risk of sinking at or above water or other substances and other workplaces, standing places or traffic routes with a fall height above 2.00 metres.
Which building-owner and coordination duties must be considered in addition to scaffold inspections.
When concerns about material or instructions must be raised before work proceeds.
How conditions, defects and documents can be preserved for a later dispute.
Which additional questions arise when defects, repair and evidence become disputed.
In construction law, deadlines and evidence decide. Call us directly or send an email, callback within one business day.
Address
BRANDAUER Rechtsanwälte GmbH Giselakai 51 5020 Salzburg
Phone
+43 662 6280000