header-logo header-logo

Health and Safety

26 February 2009
Issue: 7358 / Categories: Case law , Terms&conditions , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-detail

Couzens v T McGee & Co Ltd (now McGee Group Ltd) [2009] EWCA Civ 95, [2009] All ER (D) 191 (Feb)

If an item of equipment which has not been supplied by the employer is being used at work, it will not be “work equipment” for the purposes of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (SI 1998/2306) unless the employer expressly or impliedly permitted its use or must be deemed to have permitted its use. Express permission will be a matter for direct evidence. Implicit permission may be inferred from evidence that the respondent was aware that the item was being used and did nothing to stop it.

Issue: 7358 / Categories: Case law , Terms&conditions , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll