header-logo header-logo

15 October 2010 / Keith Patten
Issue: 7437 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

High & dry?

Keith Patten passes judgment on the Court of Appeal’s first decision on the Work at Height Regulations

For many personal injury practitioners the Work at Height Regulations 2005 (the Regulations) may not have been at the forefront of their minds in most claims. But the first case under the Regulations to come before the Court of Appeal has indicated how important they may prove to be in certain workplace claims, and has had some interesting and important things to say about the courts’ attitude to the network of statutory health and safety protection in the workplace generally.

The facts

The case in question, Bhatt v Fontain Motors Limited [2010] EWCA Civ 863 was an appeal by the defendant against a decision of the recorder in favour of the claimant, subject to a hefty finding of contributory negligence. The defendants occupied a car showroom at which the claimant worked. The defendant had acquired the premises in 2005 and had brought with it items from two previously occupied premises. These items included some 20 or 30 sets of fibreglass bumper kits. These were sold off only

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll