header-logo header-logo

27 July 2012 / Keith Patten
Issue: 7524 / Categories: Features , Damages , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

The correct approach

How should the courts apply the Manual Handling Operations Regulations, asks Keith Patten

We have reached the 20th anniversary of the Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992 (SI 1992/2793) and yet, despite this passage of time, there still seems to be a need for the Court of Appeal to remind judges of the nature of the obligations imposed and, in particular, their important distinction from many common law duties in negligence. This has led the Court of Appeal again to overturn a first instance decision in the case of Ali Ghaith v Indesit Co UK Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 642.

The factual background

The claimant was employed by the defendant as a mobile service engineer. His job consisted of carrying out repairs in customers’ houses on items such as washing machines, refrigerators etc. In order to do this he used a van supplied by the defendants which carried a stock of equipment and parts that he may need on his visits. It was the practice, once a year, to undertake a full stock-take

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll