Coia v Portavadie Estates Ltd [2015] ScotCS CSIH_3 (06 January 2015)
The wardrobe pole was not work equipment provided for use at work, the pursuer was not at work when the accident occurred, and the lodge was not a workplace under the relevant regulations. The instruction to vacate was not given in the course of employment but as part of a private occupancy agreement.
- Citation
- [2015] ScotCS CSIH_3
- Parties
- Pursuer and Appellant: Matthew Coia; Defenders and Respondents: Portavadie Estates Ltd
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 06 January 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Dunoon Sheriff Court
- Outcome
- appeal refused
- Legal Topics
- Work Equipment, Workplace Definition, Statutory Interpretation
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Matthew Coia
Pursuer and Appellant
Portavadie Estates Ltd
Defenders and Respondents
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Dunoon Sheriff Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the wardrobe pole was 'work equipment' under the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998
- 2 Whether the pursuer was 'at work' when the accident occurred
- 3 Whether the lodge was a 'workplace' under the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992
Ratio Decidendi
The wardrobe pole was not work equipment provided for use at work, the pursuer was not at work when the accident occurred, and the lodge was not a workplace under the relevant regulations. The instruction to vacate was not given in the course of employment but as part of a private occupancy agreement.
Court Disposition
appeal refused
Orders
- interlocutors of the sheriff dated 11 and 22 July 2013 affirmed
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