56
|
P a g e
The Lords denied Liverpool County Council's appeal and upheld the original decision in
favour of Knowles' claim.
Latimer v AEC Ltd [1953] – discharge of duty to take reasonable care
Latimer v AEC
[1953]
The claimant worked in the defendant's factory and slipped up on the factory floor. The
factory had become flooded due to adverse weather conditions. The defendant's had put
up warning signs mopped up and placed sawdust in the most used places to make it as
safe as possible. The trial judge held that there had been a breach of duty as the
defendants should have closed the factory if it was unsafe. However, no argument had
been advanced on this.
There was no breach of duty. There was no duty to close the factory. The defendant only
had to take reasonable precautions to minimise the risk which they had done. There
was no need to go to great expense to eliminate any possible risk and thus no obligation
to close the factory.
Lister v Romford Ice and Cold Storage Co Ltd [1957] AC555 – negligence of fellow
employees regarding vicarious liability; joint tortfeasors and subrogation
Martin Lister and his father were working for a company specialising in Cold Storage,
driving a waste disposal lorry. They went to a slaughterhouse on Old Church Road,
When they were entering through the gates to the yard, the father got out
ahead and the son, driving, backed over him. McNair J awarded the father two thirds of
the compensation to reflect the father’s contributory
The insurers, who paid
£1600 and costs, sued the son in the name of the company (which was not consulted) by
right o
t
them for this sum.
The majority of the Court of Appeal ([1956] 2 QB 180), Birkett LJ and Romer LJ, held
that the insurance company could seek contribution from the son, because the son had a
contractual duty of care and skill and it was not permissible to imply a term that no
indemnity could be sought.
Machray v Stewart and Lloyds Ltd [1964] – employer’s duty to provide sufficient
plant-
Lawrence Bamber
goes back to some more landmark legal judgments.
This is the third in an occasional series looking at the classic case law in Unit A8:
Criminal Law and Unit A9: Civil Law of the NEBOSH Diploma. Here, we are looking at
cases that have set the scene for existing and future legislation and judicial precedents
in the area of health and safety (mis)management.
The cases cover:
managers' liability under the Health and Safety at Work (HSW) Act
provision of adequate equipment to control risk
the balance of cost and risk in deciding reasonable practicability
employers' responsibility for controlling risks posed by co-workers' behaviour
