The claimant was injured on a poolside on an ‘It’s a Knock Out’ fun day organised by the defendants. He suggested that the risk assessment was inadequate. Held: The claim failed. The question for decision is not whether adequate risk assessments had been undertaken, but whether the defendants took reasonable measures to ensure that the … Continue reading Uren v Corporate Leisure (UK) Ltd and Others: QBD 22 Jan 2010
Judges: Jeremy Baker J Citations:  EWHC 810 (QB),  WLR(D) 226 Links: Bailii, WLRD Statutes: Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992, Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Health and Safety, Personal Injury Updated: 13 April 2022; Ref: scu.609114
The claimant was working in a prison supervising working prisoners. One of them dropped a bag of rice on her causing injury. At the County Curt, the prisoner was found negligence in the prisoner, but not the appellant for vicarious liability. The claimant’s appeal succeeded at the Court of Appeal. Held: The Minister’s appeal failed. … Continue reading Cox v Ministry of Justice: SC 2 Mar 2016
 EWCA Crim 1693 Bailii Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 England and Wales Crime, Health and Safety Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: scu.669848
The claimant was severely injured when electrocuted by an overhead cable at work. He was on a platform raised by an associate. Held: the system of work did give rise to danger. Because of the failure to provide Mr Milroy with proper training or other satisfactory notification of the appropriate system, BT created and are … Continue reading Milroy v British Telecommunications Plc: QBD 5 Mar 2015
‘whether or not the duty imposed by Regulation 9 is absolute, and does not require the proof of any fault on the part of the employer. Should the adequacy of the training given to an employee be judged by the result in the light of events or should it, as the judge held, be assessed … Continue reading Allison v London Underground Ltd: CA 13 Feb 2008
Appeal against rejection of claim for personal injury. While working as the catering manager at HM Prison Swansea, the Claimant was injured in an accident caused by the negligence of a prisoner carrying out paid work under her supervision. The prisoner had dropped a large bag of rice on her whilst she was kneeling. The … Continue reading Cox v Ministry of Justice: CA 19 Feb 2014
(Extra Division Inner House) ‘In this action for damages for personal injury three central issues arise: (1) Was the wardrobe pole which fell and injured the pursuer ‘work equipment provided by the defenders for use or used by an employee of theirs at work’ for the purpose of The Provision and Use of Work Equipment … Continue reading Coia v Portavadie Estates Ltd: SCS 6 Jan 2015
The claimant sought damages after suffering injury when falling from a ladder working on the uninsured builder’s site. He sued the owners of the property, saying that by refusing to allow or pay for the work to be conducted in safer ways, she had taken control over the works and made herself responsible, pointing to … Continue reading Kmiecic v Isaacs: QBD 12 Mar 2010
The employee appealed against a finding that the employers were not liable for a breach of the 1998 Regulations leading to his injuries at work. As a crane driver at a steel works, he had incurred back pain due to what he said was a bad posture in the crane cab. Held: It was not … Continue reading Willock and Others v Corus UK Ltd: CA 17 May 2013
The deceased worked for the defendants on an oil rig. He was injured by a door closer he was attempting to repair. The defendants denied that the mechanism was equipment within the Regulations. Held: The appeal was allowed. The door closer was apparatus for use at work, though provided by a different company. The Regulations … Continue reading Spencer-Franks v Kellogg Brown and Root Ltd and others: HL 2 Jul 2008
The claimant, a health care worker was visiting the home of a client when she fell from a defective wheelchair ramp and suffered injury. She sought damages from her employer. Held: Her appeal failed (Lord Hope and Lady Hale dissenting). The test was whether the equipment was sufficiently incorporated into and adopted as part of … Continue reading Smith v Northamptonshire County Council: HL 20 May 2009
(Swansea County Court) While working as a catering manager at HM Prison Swansea, the claimant suffered injury in an accident caused by the negligence of a prisoner who was carrying out paid work under her supervision. She now sought damages from the Ministry Held: The prisoner was negligent, but not the prison service. Though there … Continue reading Cox v Ministry of Justice: Misc 3 May 2013
Whether a company director suffering injury at work could claim notwithstanding he had been the cause of the company’s default.
Held: ‘As a general rule the remedy for breach of a director’s duty of care is compensation for the harm caused to . .
The claimant was employed as a care worker to collect patients to take them to a day centre. She was injured when a wheelchair ramp in a patient’s home collapsed.
Held: The council were not responsible under the Regulations. They did not own . .
The claimant firefighter crushed a finger trying to release a traffic accident victim with a heavy machine for expanding gaps in metal. The defendant appealed on liability. The court was asked whether a simple warning of the possible danger was . .
The court considered liability after serious injury was suffered by a professional jockey during a steeplechase. His horse threw him after landing and he collided with a guard rail. He now appealed against dismissal of his claim.
Held: His . .
Appeal against a decision dismissed the claim of the appellant against his employer, the respondent defendant for damages for personal injury. . .
The claimant, a nurse employed by the defendant, appealed against the refusal of her claim for personal injury suffered operating a hoist whose wheels jammed when they hit a plinth in the floor. No risk assessment was in place.
Held: The judge . .
The claimant was a self employed contractor. He suffered serious injuries when while working for the defendant, his vehicle overturned. The defendant appealed against the finding of liability. The Land Rover went out of control on a steeply sloping . .
The claimant was replacing a computer memory card. He fell from a ladder suffering injury. He was employed by the defendant contracting for another defendant, and used a ladder on loan from another neighbour.
Held: The contribution sought from . .
The claimant was injured working for the defendants on a semi-submersible platform. He fell from a ladder which was not secured properly. He alleged a breach of the Regulations. The defendant denied any breach and asserted that the claimant had . .
A lift was held to be work equipment within the Regulations. . .
The claimant alleged injury from use of a torque wrench, and succeeded. The employer appealed.
Held: Though the appeal failed, the judge should have been careful not to consider the expert’s evidence separately, and not first making . .
The court considered the effect of the regulations: ‘Regulation 4 and indeed 5 are concerned with the physical condition of the equipment on the assumption that they will be properly operated by properly trained and instructed personnel.’ A risk . .
The application of the phrase ‘work equipment’ is to protect the workman using such equipment. This might embrace routine maintenance or cleaning or even minor repairing while the machine is operating. The 1998 Regulations should not be interpreted . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
The claimant had served an asset freezing order on the bank in respect of one of its customers. The bank paid out on a cheque inadvertently as to the order. The Commissioners claimed against the bank in negligence. The bank denied any duty of care. Held: The bank’s appeal succeeded. The bank owed a duty … Continue reading HM Customs and Excise v Barclays Bank Plc: HL 21 Jun 2006
The taxpayers used schemes to create allowable losses, and now appealed assessment to tax. The schemes involved a series of transactions none of which were a sham, but which had the effect of cancelling each other out. Held: If the true nature of the transactions could be seen by looking at them all together, then … Continue reading W T Ramsay Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners: HL 12 Mar 1981
The claimant sought damages after hitting his knee when a trolley he was pushing stopped abruptly on hitting a raised slab on the defendant’s pathway. Held: The defendant’s appeal failed. In the end what was reasonable was a question of fact. ‘for the future that a case of this kind should be considered under regulations … Continue reading Craner v Dorset County Council: CA 5 Dec 2008
Account taken of circumstances wihout ambiguity The respondent gave advice on home income plans. The individual claimants had assigned their initial claims to the scheme, but later sought also to have their mortgages in favour of the respondent set aside. Held: Investors having once assigned their causes of action to the ICS, could not later … Continue reading Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society: HL 19 Jun 1997
The twelve applicants had been unfairly dismissed by the transferor immediately before the transfer, and for a reason connected with the transfer under section 8(1). The question was whether the liability for unfair dismissal compensation transferred to the transferee. Held: It is the duty of a UK court to construe a statute, so far as … Continue reading Litster and Others v Forth Dry Dock and Engineering Co Ltd: HL 16 Mar 1989