Farmer v FTV Proclad (UK) Ltd [2013] ScotCS CSOH_165 (17 October 2013)

Farmer v FTV Proclad (UK) Ltd [2013] ScotCS CSOH_165 (17 October 2013)

The defenders breached their common law and statutory duties by permitting use of an unsafe, uneven traffic route, which posed a foreseeable risk of injury and caused the pursuer's accident. However, the pursuer was contributorily negligent by choosing to use the hazardous route despite being an experienced employee with supervisory responsibilities. Damages are reduced by one-third for contributory negligence.

Citation
[2013] ScotCS CSOH_165
Parties
Pursuer: James Farmer; Defender: FTV Proclad (UK) Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Reparation Action (personal Injury) / Judgment After Proof (trial)
Outcome
Judgment for the pursuer with reduction for contributory negligence.
Legal Topics
Employer's Liability, Workplace Safety, Contributory Negligence, Workplace (health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992, Damages
Employment Law Personal Injury Health and Safety Employer's Liability Workplace Safety Contributory Negligence Workplace (health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 Damages

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Farmer

Pursuer

FTV Proclad (UK) Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Reparation Action (personal Injury) / Judgment After Proof (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defenders breached their common law and statutory duties to provide a safe workplace under the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992, Regulations 12 and 17.
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer was contributorily negligent and to what extent.

Ratio Decidendi

The defenders breached their common law and statutory duties by permitting use of an unsafe, uneven traffic route, which posed a foreseeable risk of injury and caused the pursuer's accident. However, the pursuer was contributorily negligent by choosing to use the hazardous route despite being an experienced employee with supervisory responsibilities. Damages are reduced by one-third for contributory negligence.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the pursuer with reduction for contributory negligence.

Orders

  • Defenders liable to the pursuer in damages of £14,667 Sterling with interest at the judicial rate from date of decree until payment.
  • Question of expenses reserved.