header-logo header-logo

Risky business

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

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll