Mackenzie v Alcoa Manufacturing (GB) Ltd

Mackenzie v Alcoa Manufacturing (GB) Ltd

From 1970, the respondent was under a duty to conduct noise surveys. The absence of such surveys, unexplained by the respondent, required the court to interpret the claimant's evidence benevolently. The judge erred in not applying this principle and in failing to address the specific duty for peripatetic workers post-1972. The appeal is allowed and the case remitted for assessment of damages.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Mr Brian MacKenzie; Respondent/second Defendant: Alcoa Manufacturing (GB) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From County Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Noise Induced Deafness, Employer's Duty of Care, Breach of Statutory Duty, Negligence, Limitation Period, Evidential Burden, Noise Surveys, Industrial Disease
Tort Employment Law Personal Injury Noise Induced Deafness Employer's Duty of Care Breach of Statutory Duty Negligence Limitation Period +3 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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Brian MacKenzie

Appellant/claimant

Alcoa Manufacturing (GB) Limited

Respondent/second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From County Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent was in breach of duty by failing to conduct noise surveys from 1970 onwards
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was tortiously exposed to excessive noise
  3. 3 Whether the absence of noise surveys should lead to adverse inferences against the respondent

Ratio Decidendi

From 1970, the respondent was under a duty to conduct noise surveys. The absence of such surveys, unexplained by the respondent, required the court to interpret the claimant's evidence benevolently. The judge erred in not applying this principle and in failing to address the specific duty for peripatetic workers post-1972. The appeal is allowed and the case remitted for assessment of damages.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Case remitted to the County Court for assessment of damages