Walsh v CP Hart & Sons Ltd

Walsh v CP Hart & Sons Ltd

The employer failed to carry out a suitable and sufficient risk assessment addressing the risk of falling from the load bed and did not implement the reasonably practicable measure of keeping the tail lift raised when workers were in the van. The trial judge erred in applying a simple balancing test rather than the correct test of gross disproportionality for reasonable practicability. The employer was in breach of statutory duty, and the claimant's damages are reduced by 50% for contributory negligence.

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

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 13 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

Personal Injury Appeal / 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 suitable safety measures to prevent falls from the back of a van.
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge applied the correct legal test for 'reasonable practicability' in assessing employer's liability.
  3. 3 Whether the claimant was contributorily negligent.

Ratio Decidendi

The employer failed to carry out a suitable and sufficient risk assessment addressing the risk of falling from the load bed and did not implement the reasonably practicable measure of keeping the tail lift raised when workers were in the van. The trial judge erred in applying a simple balancing test rather than the correct test of gross disproportionality for reasonable practicability. The employer was in breach of statutory duty, and the claimant's damages are reduced by 50% for contributory negligence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Judgment for the claimant subject to contributory negligence.

Orders

  • Judgment for the claimant with a 50% deduction for contributory negligence.