McFarlane v. Corus Construction And Industrial [2006] ScotCS CSOH_38 (07 March 2006)

McFarlane v. Corus Construction And Industrial [2006] ScotCS CSOH_38 (07 March 2006)

The court found that the pursuer was injured when the barrowbuff toppled off the edge of a steel plate due to its unsuitable construction and lack of safety features, constituting a breach of the employer's statutory duties under regulation 4(1) and 4(3) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. The defenders failed to ensure the equipment was suitable for use near plate edges without edgers, and left safety precautions to the operator's discretion. The pursuer did not succeed under the Manual Handling Operations Regulations, as the operation was not a manual handling operation within the meaning of the regulations. The court also found the defenders negligent at common...

Citation
[2006] ScotCS CSOH_38
Parties
Pursuer: William McFarlane; Defender: Corus Construction and Industrial
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
07 March 2006
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Action (damages in Reparation) / Judgment After Proof (trial)
Outcome
Judgment for the pursuer.
Legal Topics
Employer's Liability, Work Equipment Safety, Manual Handling, Statutory Duties, Negligence, Contributory Negligence
Employment Law Health and Safety Law Tort/delict Employer's Liability Work Equipment Safety Manual Handling Statutory Duties Negligence +1 more

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

Parties

William McFarlane

Pursuer

Corus Construction and Industrial

Defender

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Action (damages in Reparation) / Judgment After Proof (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer sustained injury in the course of employment due to unsafe work equipment and/or unsafe system of work
  2. 2 Whether the defenders breached statutory duties under the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 and the Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992
  3. 3 Whether the defenders were negligent at common law

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the pursuer was injured when the barrowbuff toppled off the edge of a steel plate due to its unsuitable construction and lack of safety features, constituting a breach of the employer's statutory duties under regulation 4(1) and 4(3) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. The defenders failed to ensure the equipment was suitable for use near plate edges without edgers, and left safety precautions to the operator's discretion. The pursuer did not succeed under the Manual Handling Operations Regulations, as the operation was not a manual handling operation within the meaning of the regulations. The court also found the defenders negligent at common...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the pursuer.

Orders

  • Defenders to pay the agreed sum of £4000 in damages to the pursuer, with interest at 8% per annum from the date of decree until payment.