header-logo header-logo

29 February 2008
Issue: 7310 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

HEALTH AND SAFETY

Allison v London Underground Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 71, [2008] All ER (D) 185 (Feb)

The test for the adequacy of training for the purposes of health and safety (under reg 9 of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (SI 1998/2306)) is what training was needed in the light of what the employer ought to have known about the risks arising from the activities of his business.

To say that the training is adequate if it deals only with the risks which the employer knows about is to impose no greater a duty than exists at common law.

The statutory duty is higher and imposes on the employer a duty to investigate the risks inherent in his operations, taking professional advice where necessary (per Lady Justice Smith at para 55).
 

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll