NEBOSH Certificate Case LawJohn Johnston

www.healthandsafetytips.co.uk

1There is no such thing as a 'stupid' or 'daft' health and safety question!

Introduction• This presentation highlights the case law that

NEBOSH Certificate students should be aware of

• It gives a general understanding of the core principles of health and safety legislation within the UK

• The slides also have notes added with further information on the cases

• Additional information is provided by SafetyPhoto.co.uk

2There is no such thing as a 'stupid' or 'daft' health and safety question!

Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932)

Duty of Care – Neighbour Principle

• Negligence

• Whether duty owed to person injured

• Duty of manufacturer of article to ultimate consumer

• Bottle of ginger beer bought from retailer

• Bottle containing dead snail

• Purchaser poisoned by drinking contents

• Liability of manufacturer to consumer

• More details here – SafetyPhoto.co.uk

3There is no such thing as a 'stupid' or 'daft' health and safety question!

Edwards v. National Coal Board (1949)

Reasonably Practicable – ‘the Quantum of Risk’

• The balance of cost, time and trouble

• Mr Edwards was killed when an unsupported section of a travelling road in a mine gave way, only about half the whole length of the road was shored up. The company argued that the cost of shoring up all roads in every mine was prohibitive when compared to the risk

• “so far as is reasonably practicable” means that the degree of risk needs to be balanced against the time, trouble and cost involved in taking the necessary measures to avoid the risk

• More details here – SafetyPhoto.co.uk

4There is no such thing as a 'stupid' or 'daft' health and safety question!

Wilsons & Clyde Coal Co. Ltd v. English (1938)

Employers’ Common Law Duty of Care (Employers’ Liability)

• The employers were held liable for injuries to a miner

as a result of an unsafe system of working

• The House of Lords held that the employer owes a

duty of care to his employee:

o Safe place of work

o Safe equipment

o Safe system of work

o Provision of competent staff and effective supervision

5There is no such thing as a 'stupid' or 'daft' health and safety question!

Wilsons & Clyde Coal Co. Ltd v. English (1938)

Employers’ Common Law Duty of Care (Employers’ Liability)

• These duties were owed personally by the employer

to each employee and were non-delegable

• The performance of the duties could be delegated,

but the responsibility for them could not

• More details here – SafetyPhoto.co.uk

6There is no such thing as a 'stupid' or 'daft' health and safety question!

Marshall v Gotham Co Ltd (1954)

So far as is practicable• The employer was not liable for a breach of

statutory duty because Marshall’s death had not

been caused by any failure by them to take

reasonable steps to secure the roof

• Comparison of ‘practicable’ and ‘reasonably

practicable’ precautions

• Generally interpreted to mean that whatever is

technically possible in the light of current

knowledge must be carried out

• The cost, time and trouble are NOT to be taken into

account when arriving at a decision

• More details here – SafetyPhoto.co.uk7There is no such thing as a 'stupid' or 'daft' health and safety question!

Mersey Docks & Harbour Board v. Coggins &

Griffiths (Liverpool) Ltd. (1947)

Vicarious Liability

• Master/servant relationship – persons who must be

protected

• The test:

• “Who had the authority to direct or delegate to the

workman the manner in which the vehicle was

driven?”

• More details here – SafetyPhoto.co.uk

8There is no such thing as a 'stupid' or 'daft' health and safety question!

With Thanks to SafetyPhoto

www.safetyphoto.co.uk

Don’t forget to read the notes

in this presentation for

additional information

on each case

www.healthandsafetytips.co.uk

9There is no such thing as a 'stupid' or 'daft' health and safety question!