Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
control inquiry would be focused on the performance of the work and the condition of the premises. Unless specific facts (e.g., a contract which required the Space Needle to provide for the safety of the workers) pointed to retained right of control, the principal would have no liability. Here the alleged dangerous condition relates to a condition of the work site and the failure to provide protective barriers, so our scope of retained control inquiry must focus on the elevators. Within the scope of that limited control, the Space Needle had a duty of care. Accord Phillips, 74 Wn. App. at 751; Greenleaf v. Puget Sound Bridge & Dredging Co., 58 Wn.2d 647, 652, 364 P.2d 796 (1961) (finding the common law duty was breached by failing to provide proper lighting); Doss, 60 Wn. App. at 130 . The Space Needle retained sufficient control
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that summary judgment was improper because the common law duty might have been breached by failing to provide a safety net above the worker to guard against falling slag
B. holding that the issue of whether or not a defendant airline breached its duty of due care by failing to transfer a pregnant employee from a flight precluded summary judgment for the defendant on plaintiffs negligence claim
C. holding that the trial court correctly entered summary judgment in favor of defendant and denied plaintiffs motion for summary judgment where plaintiff failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that defendant breached its duty to act in good faith
D. holding on summary judgment before the question of the insurers obligation to indemnify was decided that the insurer was liable for the costs of the insured in defending the declaratory judgment action because it breached its duty to defend
E. holding that the rule bars subcontractors negligence claim because no independent duty was breached
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.