Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Health and Safety - From: 2004 To: 2004

This page lists 19 cases, and was prepared on 27 May 2018.

 
Doherty and others v Rugby Joinery (UK) Limited [2004] EWCA Civ 147; Times, 03 March 2004; [2004] ICR 1272
17 Feb 2004
CA
Lord Justice Auld, Lady Justice Hale, Mr Justice Wilson
Personal Injury, Health and Safety
The claimant had used a sander, and been injured with vibration induced white finger syndrome. The employee appealed against a finding of non-liability saying the company should have known of the risk. Held: It had become accepted that use of such equipment for more than a certain time each day would be dangerous. The defendant in fact did not know of the danger. Any liability would rely upon a finding of constructive knowledge. Knowledge of the danger had been disseminated only from 1990, and none of the employer's duties were triggered before 1991.
Hale LJ said that there is: "a distinction between holding that a reasonable employer should have been aware of the risks and holding that certain steps should have been taken to meet that risk".
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Sherlock v Chester City Council [2004] EWCA Civ 210; [2004] EWCA Civ 201
26 Feb 2004
CA

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Jaguar Cars Ltd v Coates [2004] EWCA Civ 337
4 Mar 2004
CA

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

[ Bailii ]
 
Mcfarlane v Ferguson Shipbuilders Limited [2004] ScotCS 68
16 Mar 2004
OHCS
Lady Smith
Scotland, Health and Safety

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ]
 
Donachie v The Chief Constable of the Greater Manchester Police [2004] EWCA Civ 405
7 Apr 2004
CA
Lord Justice Auld Lord Justice Latham Lady Justice Arden
Personal Injury, Health and Safety
The claimant had been asked to work under cover. The surveillance equipment he was asked to use was faulty, requiring him to put himself at risk repeatedly to maintain it resulting in a stress disorder and a stroke. Held: There was a direct line of causation between the known faults in the equipment, and the failure to operate a safe system of work, and the stroke. The court had erred in applying Sutherland v Hatton, and should have considered whether the claimant was a primary or secondary victim. He was a primary victim. The injury was foreseeable and the appeal was allowed.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Duthie v Bath and North East Somerset Council [2004] EWCA Civ 1194
9 Jun 2004
CA

Employment, Health and Safety

1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Hammond v Commissioner of Police for Metropolis and others [2004] EWCA Civ 830; [2004] ICR 1467
11 Jun 2004
CA
May LJ
Personal Injury, Health and Safety
The claimant mechanic was employed by the Commissioner of Police. He was working on the wheel of a police dog van when the shearing of a wheel bolt caused him to suffer injury. The question was whether the van was "work equipment" within the meaning of the 1992 regulations, which defined "work equipment": "any machinery, appliance, apparatus or tool and any assembly of components which, in order to achieve a common end, are arranged and controlled so that they function as a whole." The scope of the duty is defined by regulation 4(1): "The requirements imposed by these Regulations on an employer shall apply in respect of work equipment provided for use or used by any of his employees who is at work." Held: May LJ said: "Although the definition of what may be work equipment is to be found in regulation 2, the ambit of the expression 'work equipment' in these Regulations is determined by regulation 4 . . This indicates…that the Regulations are concerned with what may loosely be described as the tools of the trade provided by an employer to an employee to enable the employee to carry out his work . . The van might well be work equipment of a policeman driving it, but not of the police mechanic repairing it."
Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1992 6
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Fytche v Wincanton Logistics Plc [2004] UKHL 31; Times, 02 July 2004; [2004] ICR 975; [2004] IRLR 817; [2004] 4 All ER 221
1 Jul 2004
HL
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Baroness Hale of Richmond
Health and Safety
The claimant was employed as a milk truck driver. He was issued with a pair of boots capped to protect his feet from impact. In a snowstorm, and against company advice, he sough to dig himself out. The boots leaked and he suffered frostbite. He claimed for the injury, saying that under the regulations, since the boots were protective equipment, and as a result of a fault he was injured, the company was liable. Held: The injury suffered was not of the kind from which the boots were designed to give protection. The regulations gave effect to the Directive which was intended to protect against perceived risks. By a majority the House held that any special duty to the claimant under the Regulations extended to the risks against which the protection was provided.
Lord Hoffmann said: "The purpose of PPE is, therefore, as a last resort after collective protection or methods of work organisation, to avoid or limit risks"
Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992 (SI 1992/2966) 7(1) - Personal Protective Equipment Directive (89/656/EEC)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ House of Lords ]

 
 Home Office v Lowles; CA 29-Jul-2004 - [2004] EWCA Civ 985
 
King v Farmer (T/A Rw Farmer (Builders)) [2004] EWHC B2 (QB)
6 Aug 2004
QBD
Rutherford J
Personal Injury, Health and Safety

Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996
[ Bailii ]
 
Commission v Austria C-359/03 (Social Policy) [2004] EUECJ C-359/03
30 Sep 2004
ECJ

European, Health and Safety
ECJ Failure to fulfill obligations - Directive 90/270 / EEC - Protection of workers - Work with display screen equipment - Minimum safety and health requirements - Failure to transpose
Directive 90/270/EEC
[ Bailii ]
 
Pfeiffer etc v Deutsches Rotes Kreuz, Kreisverband Waldshut eV 3 C-400/01; [2004] EUECJ C-400/01
5 Oct 2004
ECJ

European, Health and Safety
ECJ Social policy - Protection of the health and safety of workers - Directive 93/104/EC - Scope - Emergency workers in attendance in ambulances in the framework of an emergency service run by the German Red Cross - Definition of - road transport - Maximum weekly working time - Principle - Direct effect - Derogation - Conditions
[ Bailii ]

 
 Pfeiffer v Deutsches Rotes Kreuz, Kreisverband Waldshut eV (1); ECJ 5-Oct-2004 - C-399/01; [2004] EUECJ C-399/01; C-401/01; [2004] EUECJ C-401/01; [2004] EUECJ C-403/01; C-397/01; C-398/01; C-402/01; C-403/01; C-400/01; [2005] IRLR 137; [2004] ECR 8835; [2005] ICR 1307; [2004] ECR I-8835

 
 Pfeiffer v Deutsches Rotes Kreuz, Kreisverband Waldshut eV (1); ECJ 5-Oct-2004 - C-399/01; [2004] EUECJ C-399/01; C-401/01; [2004] EUECJ C-401/01; [2004] EUECJ C-403/01; C-397/01; C-398/01; C-402/01; C-403/01; C-400/01; [2005] IRLR 137; [2004] ECR 8835; [2005] ICR 1307; [2004] ECR I-8835
 
Pfeiffer etc v Deutsches Rotes Kreuz, Kreisverband Waldshut eV 4 C-402/01; [2004] EUECJ C-402/01
5 Oct 2004
ECJ
V. Skouris, P
European, Health and Safety
ECJ Social policy - Protection of the health and safety of workers - Directive 93/104/EC - Scope - Emergency workers in attendance in ambulances in the framework of an emergency service run by the German Red Cross - Definition of -road transport - Maximum weekly working time - Principle - Direct effect - Derogation - Conditions.
Directive 93/104/EC
[ Bailii ]
 
Pfeiffer etc v Deutsches Rotes Kreuz, Kreisverband Waldshut eV (3) C-397/01; [2004] EUECJ C-397/01
5 Oct 2004
ECJ

European, Health and Safety
ECJ Social policy - Protection of the health and safety of workers - Directive 93/104/EC - Scope - Emergency workers in attendance in ambulances in the framework of an emergency service run by the German Red Cross - Definition of - road transport - Maximum weekly working time - Principle - Direct effect - Derogation - Conditions
Directive 93/104/EC
[ Bailii ]
 
Kent County Council v Health and Safety Executive [2004] EWHC 2861 (Admin)
23 Nov 2004
Admn

Magistrates, Health and Safety

[ Bailii ]
 
the Chief Constable of Tayside Police v Douglas James Fisher EATS/0048/04
15 Dec 2004
EAT
The Honourable Lord Johnston
Employment, Health and Safety
EAT Health & Safety

 
Commission v Autriche C-358/03
16 Dec 2004
ECJ

European, Health and Safety
Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Workers' protection - Health and safety of workers - Manual handling of loads where there is a risk of injury to workers.

 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.