The plaintiff sought damages after being hit when, on her way into work taking a short cut across a stockyard, she was hit.
Held: Havers J, having referred to the employer’s duty in respect of access where the place of work abuts a highway, said: ‘A different position may arise if – as in the present case – the employer’s place of work is entirely surrounded, for all practical purposes, by private land belonging to somebody else. The employer clearly has to provide some means of access to his employees by which they can reach their place of work . . In such a case, where there is a right of way which the employee is entitled to use, it seems to me that if the employer intends his employees to use it, he would be under a general duty to take reasonable care that that way was reasonably safe for his employees to use. As regards the precautions which he could take, of course, regard would have to be had to the fact that he had a limited right only on the land, and that the land belonged to somebody else. I hold, in such circumstances, that there would be a duty upon the employer to take reasonable care to ensure that that way was reasonably safe for his employees’
Judges:
Havers J
Citations:
[1956] 2 QB 580
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Ashdown v Samuel Williams and Sons Ltd CA 1957
Employees used a short cut to reach premises occupied by their employer, the second defendants. The short cut crossed various railway lines, on premises belonging to the first defendants. While she was using the short cut, the plaintiff was struck . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Negligence
Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.650950
