Ammah v Kuehne Nagal Logistics Ltd: CA 22 Jan 2009

The claimant appealed dismissal of his claim for damages. He had been injured removing a pamphlet from a high shelf, having stood on an upturned plastic box. A riser had been provided, and the employer’s manual told employees not to stand on such boxes. He had been given no training on induction.
Held: The appeal failed. ‘the respondent complied with its duty of care to ensure a safe system of work in relation to access to the upper shelves. Not only was suitable equipment available, but employees were instructed to use that equipment and not to stand on boxes for the purpose. The risk associated with standing on a box had been identified but had been adequately guarded against by the instruction given. Employees may occasionally have stood on boxes, but it was not a common practice and it was not condoned. In standing on a box, the appellant took a risk for which only he, and not his employer, was to blame. There is no basis for holding the respondent liable for the injury he sustained. ‘

Ward LJ, Richards LJ, Aikens LJ
[2009] EWCA Civ 11
England and Wales
CitedGeneral Cleaning Contractors Ltd v Christmas HL 1953
It is the duty of the employer to consider the situation, devise a suitable system and instruct his employees what they must do and to provide appropriate equipment. In leaving it to individual workmen to take precautions against an obvious danger, . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health and Safety, Personal Injury

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.280132