Baker v Quantum Clothing Group & Ors [2009] EWCA Civ 499 (22 May 2009)

Baker v Quantum Clothing Group & Ors [2009] EWCA Civ 499 (22 May 2009)

Employers were not in breach of common law duty for failing to provide hearing protection for noise exposure between 85 and 89dB(A)lepd until the late 1980s, as compliance with official guidance setting 90dB(A)lepd as the action level was sufficient for a reasonable employer. However, under section 29 of the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] EWCA Civ 499
Parties
Appellant: Stephanie Baker; 1st Respondent: Quantum Clothing Group; 2nd Respondent: Meridian Limited; 3rd Respondent: Pretty Polly Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; judge's approach to section 29 of the Factories Act 1961 was incorrect; matter remitted for reconsideration of statutory liability applying the correct objective test.
Legal Topics
Employer's Liability, Noise Induced Hearing Loss, Factories Act 1961 S.29, Common Law Negligence, Statutory Duty, Reasonable Practicability, Objective Safety Standard
Tort Law Employment Law Health and Safety Law Employer's Liability Noise Induced Hearing Loss Factories Act 1961 S.29 Common Law Negligence Statutory Duty +2 more

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

Parties

Stephanie Baker

Appellant

Quantum Clothing Group

1st Respondent

Meridian Limited

2nd Respondent

Pretty Polly Limited

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether employers in the knitting industry were liable for employees' hearing loss from exposure to noise below 90dB(A)lepd but above 85dB(A)lepd prior to the 1989 Noise at Work Regulations.
  2. 2 Whether the duty under section 29 of the Factories Act 1961 is stricter than the common law duty and is to be judged objectively or by reference to reasonable foreseeability.

Ratio Decidendi

Employers were not in breach of common law duty for failing to provide hearing protection for noise exposure between 85 and 89dB(A)lepd until the late 1980s, as compliance with official guidance setting 90dB(A)lepd as the action level was sufficient for a reasonable employer. However, under section 29 of the Factories Act 1961, the duty to provide a safe place of work is strict and objective, not dependent on reasonable foreseeability, and the judge erred in equating the statutory duty with the common law standard.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; judge's approach to section 29 of the Factories Act 1961 was incorrect; matter remitted for reconsideration of statutory liability applying the correct objective test.

Orders

  • Remit to trial judge for reconsideration of liability under section 29 of the Factories Act 1961 applying the objective safety standard.
  • Damages to be apportioned on a time basis if liability established for part of the period.