Donnelly -v- LPB Building Services Ltd & Anor [2012] IEHC 17 (20 January 2012)
The court found, on the balance of probabilities, that the plaintiff was not an employee of the defendants at the relevant time, and even if he was, the task of dismantling the fence was not within the scope of any employment. The injury was not sustained in the course of employment, and there was no negligence or...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2012] IEHC 17
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Patrick Donnelly; Defendant: LPB Building Services Limited; Defendant: Bernard Tansey
- Jurisdiction
- Ireland
- Judgment Date
- 20 January 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Personal Injury/employment Dispute / High Court Judgment
- Outcome
- Plaintiff's claim dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Employer Employee Relationship, Negligence, Workplace Safety, Vicarious Liability
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Patrick Donnelly
Plaintiff
LPB Building Services Limited
Defendant
Bernard Tansey
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury/employment Dispute / High Court Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaintiff was an employee of the defendants at the time of the accident
- 2 Whether the injury occurred in the course of employment
- 3 Whether the defendants were negligent or in breach of duty
Ratio Decidendi
The court found, on the balance of probabilities, that the plaintiff was not an employee of the defendants at the relevant time, and even if he was, the task of dismantling the fence was not within the scope of any employment. The injury was not sustained in the course of employment, and there was no negligence or breach of duty by the defendants.
Court Disposition
Plaintiff's claim dismissed
Orders
- Plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment