Chinery v Engineering With Excellence Ltd & Ors [2002] EWCA Civ 608 (18 April 2002)

Chinery v Engineering With Excellence Ltd & Ors [2002] EWCA Civ 608 (18 April 2002)

The third defendants (Zeldatree Ltd) were not liable to the claimant as they acted on instructions, complied with the relevant standard (DW142), had no control or knowledge of subsequent use of the room, and responsibility for safety lay with the second defendants. Apportionment of liability between first and second defendants (70:30) was upheld as the employer bears primary responsibility for employee safety, and the second defendants authorised the potentially dangerous situation.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 608
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Mark George Chinery; Defendant/appellant: Engineering with Excellence Limited; Defendant/appellant: Balfour Kilpatrick Limited; Defendant/appellant: Zeldatree Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 April 2002
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Employer's Liability, Apportionment of Liability / Appeal From Queen's Bench Division, High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Duty of Care, Apportionment of Liability, Sub Contractor Responsibility, Workplace Safety, Risk Assessment
Tort Personal Injury Employer's Liability Construction Law Duty of Care Apportionment of Liability Sub Contractor Responsibility Workplace Safety +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark George Chinery

Claimant/respondent

Engineering with Excellence Limited

Defendant/appellant

Balfour Kilpatrick Limited

Defendant/appellant

Zeldatree Limited

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Employer's Liability, Apportionment of Liability / Appeal From Queen's Bench Division, High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether third defendants (Zeldatree Ltd) owed a duty of care to the claimant
  2. 2 Proper apportionment of liability between defendants
  3. 3 Responsibility for workplace safety and risk assessment

Ratio Decidendi

The third defendants (Zeldatree Ltd) were not liable to the claimant as they acted on instructions, complied with the relevant standard (DW142), had no control or knowledge of subsequent use of the room, and responsibility for safety lay with the second defendants. Apportionment of liability between first and second defendants (70:30) was upheld as the employer bears primary responsibility for employee safety, and the second defendants authorised the potentially dangerous situation.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Third defendants' costs to be paid by first defendant
  • Second defendant to bear its own costs