0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

Griffiths v Vauxhall Motors Limited, Court of Appeal

18 March 2003
The issues

Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1992 – Risk Assessment – contributory negligence – Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998.

The facts

The Claimant fractured his left hand when a gun fitting seatbelt bolt brackets to car body shells kicked back. This had happened in the past and the Defendant had been put on notice. After the accident, when the equipment was referred to he manufacturer, it was found that the kickback occurred because the triggering had been miss-aligned and that the equipment was working within its operative parameters. No Risk Assessment had been carried out by the Defendant. The Recorder found:-

(i) That there was no inherent defect in the equipment and no breach of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998;

(ii) That the Defendant should have carried out a Risk Assessment before the accident under the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1992 and that the fact that no Risk Assessment had been carried out, gave rise to a risk of injury to the Claimant;

(iii) That the Claimant was experienced and had complained of kickback in the past and had contributed to the accident by not holding the gun with care. The Claimant’s damages were therefore reduced by 50%.

The Claimant and Defendant appealed.

The decision

1. Regulations 4 and 5 of the 1998 Regulations dealt with the physical condition of the equipment. Regulations 8 and 9 dealt with training. In dealing with Regulations 4 and 5 the Recorder was right in finding that there was no breach. Work equipment was not to be regarded as unsuitable for the purpose of the 1998 Regulations when injury results from in adequate control of mis-handling of equipment by an employee.

2. A Risk Assessment would on a balance of probabilities have identified the risk of injury. That would have given rise to the Claimant being given warning and instruction. If that had happened, it was more likely than not that the accident would not have happened.

3. The Judgment as to contributory negligence would not be interfered with.

focus on...

Legal updates

Reinstatement for property damage losses – when does it apply?

The Court of Appeal has recently considered the correct test for measuring the indemnity for property damage losses and has provided useful guidance on whether an insured needs to intend to reinstate the property to its pre-loss condition.

View

Legal updates

Coronavirus (COVID-19) insurance considerations

With instances of COVID-19 rapidly increasing throughout the UK, many businesses are considering the options available to limit staff and customer exposure to Coronavirus.

View

Legal updates

Insurance annual review 2019-2020

Welcome to our review of 2019 as we look ahead to what is on the horizon for the insurance sector in 2020.

View

Legal updates

Financial Services – ‘Duty of Care’ Bill: consumer protection or damp squib?

The Financial Services Duty of Care Bill (the “Bill”) was introduced into the House of Lords in October 2019 and had its second reading on 9 January 2020.

View

The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

mailing list sign up



Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up