employers liability and public liability

The claimant suffered a fractured spine whilst on an away day boat trip in the Bristol Channel. She missed the two-year limitation period for accidents at sea so brought a claim against the employer rather than the boat company. Acting for the employer, we brought contribution proceedings against the boat company, which were defended on the basis that limitation had expired. We lost at first instance but we successfully appealed on the point to the Court of Appeal. The case was followed by Professor McGee, the leading textbook author on limitation, because the outcome would cause a chapter of his book to be re-written. Our success resulted in a substantial saving for our client.

The claimant, a senior carer, chose to climb onto a resident’s bed to drag-lift him towards the head of the bed. In doing so she sustained an injury to her hip and alleged that her injuries would prevent her from working in a similar role in the future. The claimant alleged that her employer, our client, was negligent and in breach of its obligations under regulation 4 of the Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992 as she ought to have been provided with a mechanical aide to assist in the manual handling task. We secured evidence of the claimant’s training and the course material to show that she had received adequate training in safe manual handling techniques and that the risks had been properly assessed and reduced. The claim was dismissed and we recovered our client’s costs in full.

The claimant, 'R' attended our client’s venue to attend a concert, during which she slipped on a spilt drink whilst Bjork was on stage. At the initial trial, the judge found that the defendant 'W' was liable under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957. In particular the judge found that our client was in breach of its duty for not preventing people from taking drinks into the venue to watch the concert and for not having a system in place to guard the entrances to the venue to prevent drinks from being taken in. Knowing the effect of the judgment on subsequent events organised by our client we advised them to appeal the decision on the basis that the judge had failed to apply the correct balance between risk and response. On appeal, the Honourable Mrs Justice Slade DBE agreed with our proposition that the judge had failed to set the correct balance. The first instance judgment was set aside and the appellant court found for our client and the claimant was ordered to pay our costs of both the initial trial and the appeal.