header-logo header-logo

08 August 2013 / Robert O'Leary
Issue: 7572 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Who carries the can?

Who bears the risk for a working prisoner’s negligence? Robert O’Leary reports

There are over 130 prisons in England and Wales, the responsibility for which lies with the Ministry of Justice (MoJ). Around 83,000 prisoners are incarcerated in them. Prisoners work in the prisons, for which they are paid, albeit modestly. Staff members are often required to work alongside them, effectively in teams.

Who should bear the risk if a working prisoner negligently injures a member of the prison staff (or, for that matter, another working prisoner)? Should it be the MoJ as the “employer”? Or should an injured staff member be only allowed to sue the prisoner, in other words, probably with no effective remedy?

Cox: the facts

In Cox v MoJ [2013] EW Misc 1 (CC) (Swansea CC, HHJ Keyser QC), the claimant (C) was the manager of the catering department at HMP Swansea. The population of over 400 inmates was fed with meals prepared in the prison kitchen. The catering department comprised four members of staff and 20 prisoners who assisted in the preparation of food and in the delivery

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