In Privette v. Superior Court (1993) 5 Cal. 4th 689, the court held another exception to the general rule of nonliability, that of peculiar risk, is inapplicable in the context of workplace injuries. The peculiar risk doctrine was meant "to ensure that innocent third parties injured by the negligence of an independent contractor hired by a landowner to do inherently dangerous work on the land would not have to depend on the contractor's solvency in order to receive compensation for the injuries." ( Id. at p. 694.) The court explained that "when . . . the injuries resulting from an independent contractor's performance of inherently dangerous work are to an employee of the contractor, and thus subject to workers' compensation coverage, the doctrine of peculiar risk affords no basis for the employee to seek recovery of tort damages from the person who hired the contractor but did not cause the injuries." ( Id. at p. 702.) In the employment situation, the application of the peculiar risk doctrine "produces the anomalous result that a nonnegligent person's liability for an injury is greater than that of the person whose negligence actually caused the injury . . . ." ( Id. at p. 698.) In Privette v. Superior Court (1993) the Supreme Court held that the hirer of an independent contractor who hires the contractor to perform inherently dangerous work, that is, work involving a "peculiar risk," may not be held liable to an employee of the independent contractor injured as a result of the independent contractor's negligence. The court explained: "When an employee of the independent contractor hired to do dangerous work suffers a work-related injury, the employee is entitled to recovery under the state's workers' compensation system. That statutory scheme, which affords compensation regardless of fault, advances the same policies that underlie the doctrine of peculiar risk. Thus, when the contractor's failure to provide safe working conditions results in injury to the contractor's employee, additional recovery from the person who hired the contractor--a nonnegligent party--advances no societal interest that is not already served by the workers' compensation system." (Privette, supra, 5 Cal. 4th at p. 692.)