header-logo header-logo

A fair hearing?

09 December 2010 / Theo Huckle KC
Issue: 7445 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Theo Huckle reports on industrial diseases & employer liability

The Supreme Court heard argument in Baker v Quantum last month. The case, arising from the Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire Deafness Litigation, concerns employer’s liability for noise induced hearing loss (NIHL) caused by long-term occupational noise exposure.

Miss Baker worked as a sewing machinist within the Coats group from 1971 to 1989 when she was provided with and wore ear plugs. The following year the Noise at Work Regulations 1989 (SI 1989/1790) provided that employers must at least offer hearing protection to those exposed at 85 dB(A)  (the accepted average of sound levels taken over the main human hearing frequencies) averaged over the standard eight hour working day, with mandatory provision above 90 dB(A). 

Adopting “action levels” of this type is, however, somewhat simplistic, since much depends upon the length of time in weeks and years to which the person is exposed to the particular noise level. In the case of sewing machinists like Miss Baker, the period was commonly a working life of 25

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll