EL: Breach: Safe place of work

Question 1

Smith v Charles Baker and Sons

Answer 1

• Safe place includes: equipment, materials and adequate plant.

Question 2

Wilson v Tyneside Window Cleaning

Answer 2

Facts?
- Employer failed to notice that window handles on third party premises were rotten.
Principle?
- No breach.
- Providing safe place to work includes E’s own premises AND third party premises.
- But standard might be lower in recognition of E’s ability to check third party premises - difficult/impractical.

Question 3

Mulcahy v Ministry of Defence

Answer 3

Facts?
- Soldier who suffered hearing loss during encounter with Iraqi troops in Gulf War not entitled to compensation.
Principle?
- DOC did not extend to cover soldiers in battle conditions.

Question 4

Qualcast v Haynes

Answer 4

Facts?
- Employer provided protective boots against danger of splashing molten metal. Did not insist that C wore them but C very experienced.
Principle?
- Duty to provide safe place of work extends to safe machinery/plant/equipment - including safety features and PROTECTIVE CLOTHING.

Question 5

Yorkshire Traction Co. Ltd v Walter Searby

Answer 5

Facts?
- C was bus driver stabbed by passenger.
- Claimed bus company was negligent in failing to use protective screens.
- Had been installed on some buses but some bus drivers complained they reflected light.
Principle? Bus company not negligent in failing to put screens up in all buses.
- Risk of being attacked by passengers is low.
- Some bus drivers had complained of light reflection where the screens HAD been put up.