Yates v National Trust

Yates v National Trust

The National Trust did not owe the claimant a relevant duty of care in the selection or supervision of Joe Jackman as an independent contractor. The claimant was not an employee of the Trust, the Trust did not exercise control over the work, and Joe Jackman was reasonably regarded as competent based on prior satisfactory work. The risks were ordinary to the claimant's calling as a tree surgeon. Even if a duty existed, the Trust was not negligent in its selection of contractor. Therefore, the claim fails.

Parties
Claimant: Jamie Alexander Yates; Defendant: National Trust
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Negligence / Judgment on Preliminary Issue of Liability
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Duty of Care, Occupiers Liability Act 1957, Selection of Independent Contractors, Work at Height Regulations 2005
Tort Law Occupiers' Liability Negligence Duty of Care Occupiers Liability Act 1957 Selection of Independent Contractors Work at Height Regulations 2005

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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jamie Alexander Yates

Claimant

National Trust

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Negligence / Judgment on Preliminary Issue of Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the National Trust owed the claimant a relevant duty of care in the selection and supervision of its independent contractor, Joe Jackman, and his team, including the claimant.
  2. 2 Whether the National Trust was negligent in its selection of Joe Jackman as contractor for the tree felling operation.
  3. 3 Whether any breach of duty by the National Trust was causative of the claimant's injuries.

Ratio Decidendi

The National Trust did not owe the claimant a relevant duty of care in the selection or supervision of Joe Jackman as an independent contractor. The claimant was not an employee of the Trust, the Trust did not exercise control over the work, and Joe Jackman was reasonably regarded as competent based on prior satisfactory work. The risks were ordinary to the claimant's calling as a tree surgeon. Even if a duty existed, the Trust was not negligent in its selection of contractor. Therefore, the claim fails.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed