header-logo header-logo

15 October 2010 / Keith Patten
Issue: 7437 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

High & dry?

Keith Patten passes judgment on the Court of Appeal’s first decision on the Work at Height Regulations

For many personal injury practitioners the Work at Height Regulations 2005 (the Regulations) may not have been at the forefront of their minds in most claims. But the first case under the Regulations to come before the Court of Appeal has indicated how important they may prove to be in certain workplace claims, and has had some interesting and important things to say about the courts’ attitude to the network of statutory health and safety protection in the workplace generally.

The facts

The case in question, Bhatt v Fontain Motors Limited [2010] EWCA Civ 863 was an appeal by the defendant against a decision of the recorder in favour of the claimant, subject to a hefty finding of contributory negligence. The defendants occupied a car showroom at which the claimant worked. The defendant had acquired the premises in 2005 and had brought with it items from two previously occupied premises. These items included some 20 or 30

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

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Partner and Manchester office lead appointed head of family

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

DWF insurance services director appointed to Civil Justice Council

R3—Jodie Wildridge

R3—Jodie Wildridge

Kings Chambers barrister appointed chair of R3 Yorkshire

NEWS

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
back-to-top-scroll