header-logo header-logo

13 May 2016 / Carrie de Silva
Issue: 7698 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Get your facts straight

nlj_7698_desilva

What exactly was Mr Paris doing in Stepney Borough Council’s garage in May 1947, asks Carrie de Silva

Throughout my years of studying and teaching law I have read a good many law reports but not, I will admit, for every case encountered, or even for every case mentioned in lectures. Paris v Stepney Borough Council [1950] UKHL 3, [1951] 1 All ER 42, was one such, and will be well known to many, if not all, readers. It involved the finding of negligence against an employer for not ensuring that a one-eyed workman in a garage wore goggles, with the consequence that he was injured in his one good eye and rendered blind (his other eye having been lost on active service in 1941). Expert witnesses opined that it was not usual industry practice for (fully-sighted) men to wear goggles in carrying out this sort of work.

The question posed was: did an employer owe a duty of care to the claimant where, while the likelihood of injury was the same as for

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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll