Walsh v CP Hart & Sons Ltd [2020] EWHC 37 (QB) (13 January 2020)

Walsh v CP Hart & Sons Ltd [2020] EWHC 37 (QB) (13 January 2020)

The employer breached its statutory duty by failing to identify and address the risk of falling from the back of the van in its pre-accident risk assessment and by not implementing the reasonably practicable safety measure of keeping the tail lift raised when employees were in the back of the van. The trial judge erred in applying a mere balancing exercise rather than the correct test of gross disproportionality for reasonable practicability. The employer's post-accident adoption of the safety measure demonstrated its practicability. The Claimant was contributorily negligent to the extent of 50%.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 37
Parties
Appellant/claimant: Mr Lee Walsh; Respondent/defendant: CP Hart & Sons Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal (personal Injury/employer's Liability) / High Court Appeal From County Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Judgment for the Claimant subject to 50% reduction for contributory negligence.
Legal Topics
Employer's Liability, Work at Height Regulations, Risk Assessment, Reasonable Practicability, Contributory Negligence
Employment Law Health and Safety Law Personal Injury Employer's Liability Work at Height Regulations Risk Assessment Reasonable Practicability Contributory Negligence

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Lee Walsh

Appellant/claimant

CP Hart & Sons Ltd

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (personal Injury/employer's Liability) / High Court Appeal From County Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the employer breached statutory duties under the Work at Height Regulations 2005 and Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 by failing to implement adequate safety measures to prevent falls from the back of a van.
  2. 2 Whether the employer's risk assessment and training were sufficient and whether the post-accident safety measure (keeping the tail lift raised) should have been implemented pre-accident.
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge applied the correct legal test for 'reasonable practicability' and the burden of proof.

Ratio Decidendi

The employer breached its statutory duty by failing to identify and address the risk of falling from the back of the van in its pre-accident risk assessment and by not implementing the reasonably practicable safety measure of keeping the tail lift raised when employees were in the back of the van. The trial judge erred in applying a mere balancing exercise rather than the correct test of gross disproportionality for reasonable practicability. The employer's post-accident adoption of the safety measure demonstrated its practicability. The Claimant was contributorily negligent to the extent of 50%.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Judgment for the Claimant subject to 50% reduction for contributory negligence.

Orders

  • Judgment for the Claimant on liability, reduced by 50% for contributory negligence.
  • Matter remitted for assessment of quantum if not agreed.