Chilcott v Thermal Transfer Ltd [2009] EWHC 2086 (Admin) (17 July 2009)

Chilcott v Thermal Transfer Ltd [2009] EWHC 2086 (Admin) (17 July 2009)

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by failing to apply the correct legal test; it assessed the Prohibition Notice with hindsight rather than determining whether, at the time of service, the risk justified the notice. The correct approach requires the Tribunal to assess the risk as it existed when the notice was served, forming its own view and not limiting itself to reviewing the Inspector's decision.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 2086 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Chilcott; Defendant: Thermal Transfer Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Employment Tribunal Decision / High Court (administrative Court) Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Prohibition Notice cancelled
Legal Topics
Prohibition Notice, Appeal Procedure, Error of Law, Risk Assessment, Work at Height Regulations
Employment Law Health and Safety Law Administrative Law Prohibition Notice Appeal Procedure Error of Law Risk Assessment Work at Height Regulations

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chilcott

Claimant

Thermal Transfer Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Employment Tribunal Decision / High Court (administrative Court) Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal applied the correct legal test in deciding to cancel a Prohibition Notice under section 24 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974
  2. 2 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in law by applying hindsight rather than assessing risk at the time the notice was served

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by failing to apply the correct legal test; it assessed the Prohibition Notice with hindsight rather than determining whether, at the time of service, the risk justified the notice. The correct approach requires the Tribunal to assess the risk as it existed when the notice was served, forming its own view and not limiting itself to reviewing the Inspector's decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Prohibition Notice cancelled

Orders

  • No order as to costs; each party to bear their own costs in this court and below