Health and safety

New and updated

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Failure to assess risks may cause sex discrimination

  In Day v T Pickles Farms Ltd, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) says that an employer should not wait for written notification of an employee's pregnancy before carrying out a risk assessment, and that its failure to carry out an assessment may have caused the employee detriment within the provisions of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Substance need not be named to fall under COSHH

  In Karen Bilton v Fastnet Highlands Ltd, the Scottish Court of Session holds that a fish processor who developed occupational asthma can pursue a claim for compensation against her employer under the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 1988 (COSHH), even though the substance is not specified by COSHH.

• Date:

  15 March 1999

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Sex discrimination: Failure to carry out risk assessment could have amounted to detriment

  In Day v T Pickles Farms Ltd, the EAT holds that an employer who failed to make an assessment of the risks to the health and safety of a woman of child-bearing age employed in a sandwich shop no later than the date she started working there, and certainly before she became pregnant, could thereby have subjected her to a "detriment" within the meaning of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Employers liable under HSW Act for risks caused by contractors

  The liability of an employer for the acts or omissions of a contractor it engages is the central issue in R v Associated Octel Co Ltd. Both the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords have considered this important case, and both have ruled that an employer cannot delegate the duty imposed by s.3(1) of the HSW Act.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Bad training causes back injury

  In Fraser v Greater Glasgow Health Board, a nurse successfully sues her employer, claiming it provided inadequate instruction and training in a manual handling technique.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Company may owe same duty to its contractors as to its employees

  In R v Rhône-Poulenc Rorer Ltd, the Court of Appeal rules that the requirement to provide some suitable physical means to prevent falls through fragile materials, as set out in the construction Regulations, is absolute.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Training and experience should have stopped fireman taking risks

  In Crofts v Roche Products Ltd, a firefighter who suffered a back injury while putting out a fire fails to win damages from his employer. The Court of Session holds that, given his training and experience, his employer could not anticipate he would attempt to lift or carry anything that would give rise to a risk of injury.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Health authority failed to protect radiographer from X-ray fumes

  In Ogden v Airedale Health Authority, the High Court finds a health authority negligent after it failed to protect a radiographer from harmful fumes emitted by X-ray chemicals.

• Date:

  31 December 1995

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Malcolm v Metropolitan Police Commissioners

  In Malcolm v Metropolitan Police Commissioners 1995 5 CLR 368 HC, the High Court held that the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992, regulation 5 creates an absolute statutory duty and proof that a defect in equipment had caused an accident would fix the duty holder with civil liability.

• Date:

  31 December 1995

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Barton v Wandsworth Council

  In Barton v Wandsworth Council [1995] ET/11268/94, an employment tribunal ruled that an ambulance driver employed by the technical services division of a local authority was subjected to detriment when, in circumstances of danger that he reasonably believed to be serious and imminent, he took appropriate steps to protect himself or other persons from danger.