header-logo header-logo

25 November 2010 / Karen O’Sullivan
Issue: 7443 / Categories: Features , Health & safety , LexisPSL
printer mail-detail

Risky business

Karen O’Sullivan considers the suitability of protective equipment

Health and safety legislation has been making the headlines in recent weeks, thanks to Lord Young’s report into the “compensation culture”. While recognising the huge advances which have been made in workplace safety since the Health and Safety at Work (etc) Act 1974 Lord Young notes that employers are increasingly concerned about being sued for health and safety breaches and that there has been an overzealous application of workplace legislation by some health and safety “experts”. This has resulted in health and safety obligations for employers which are too onerous and do little to protect their employees from the risk of injury.

With the media’s view being that the UK’s health and safety polices have gone too far it is perhaps fortuitous timing that the Court of Appeal have just published a judgment which neatly demonstrates why  comprehensive risk assessments need to be carried out in the workplace and the necessity for appropriate protective equipment to be provided to employees.

Threlfall

In Threlfall v Hull [2010]

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
back-to-top-scroll