header-logo header-logo

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

A fair hearing?

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

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

Consumer credit law is heading for its biggest shake-up in 50 years, with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 set to yield much of its detailed statutory machinery to FCA rules
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
back-to-top-scroll