Casson v Hudson & Anor

Casson v Hudson & Anor

The respondents did not owe duties under the Regulations because they did not instruct, control, or permit the appellant to use the ladder, and the appellant acted independently and contrary to express prohibitions.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Peter Casson; Respondent: Reverend Philip Hudson; Respondent: Parochial Church Council of St Wilfred’s Church Mereside
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Breach of Statutory Duty, Work Equipment Regulations, Control and Supervision
Tort Statutory Interpretation Employment Law Negligence Breach of Statutory Duty Work Equipment Regulations Control and Supervision

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Casson

Appellant

Reverend Philip Hudson

Respondent

Parochial Church Council of St Wilfred’s Church Mereside

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents owed statutory duties under The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 to the appellant
  2. 2 Whether the respondents had control over the appellant or the ladder for purposes of the Regulations
  3. 3 Whether the appellant was instructed or permitted to use the ladder

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents did not owe duties under the Regulations because they did not instruct, control, or permit the appellant to use the ladder, and the appellant acted independently and contrary to express prohibitions.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed