Accidents caused by work equipment


Published by a UUÂãÁÄÖ±²¥ PI & Clinical Negligence expert
Practice notes

Accidents caused by work equipment


Published by a UUÂãÁÄÖ±²¥ PI & Clinical Negligence expert

Practice notes
imgtext

This Practice Note deals with the Provision and Use of work equipment Regulations 1998, SI 1998/2306, (PUWER 1998) and the common law duty to provide and maintain safe equipment. PUWER 1998 sets out the employer’s duties with respect to all types of machine, appliance, apparatus, tool or installation for use at work. Under PUWER 1998 an employer must provide suitable work equipment, maintain the equipment, inspect equipment after installation or assembly and provide suitable information and training.

Post 1 October 2013

On 1 October 2013, section 69 of the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 (ERRA 2013) came into force. For workplace accidents occurring from that date, civil liability no longer arises from a breach of health and safety statutory duty unless the relevant regulation provides for it.

The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER 1998), SI 1998/2306 do not provide for civil liability to arise from a breach. In the circumstances, claimant practitioners will be left to rely on a breach of a regulation as support for a claim in negligence.

In

Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
Related legal acts:
Key definition:
Work equipment definition
What does Work equipment mean?

Any equipment used by an employee at work.

Read more

Popular documents

Psychiatric injury—secondary victims—case tracker

Psychiatric injury—secondary victims—case trackerThis case tracker reviews the case law which has been decided since the lead case of Alcock v Chief Constable of Yorkshire Police in 1991. Subsequent case law developed the concept of secondary victims and explored the extent that courts would allow

Psychiatric injury—establishing liability

Psychiatric injury—establishing liabilityLiability for psychiatric injury is dependent in part on the nature of the injuries suffered and the manner in which they were sustained.Classifying the victimWhere a claimant suffers both physical and psychiatric injury (even if the physical injury was very

Issuing claims—safety in numbers (Abbott v Ministry of Defence)

PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: This appeal judgment of the Divisional Court deals with the permissibility of issuing more than one claim on a single (group) claim form. It provides guidance on the procedure to be adopted when issuing claims for multiple claimants with related or similar causes

Is industrial deafness the new whiplash?

Personal Injury analysis: Are industrial deafness cases costing more? Christopher Briggs, associate in the serious injury division at Pannone, part of Slater & Gordon, says these cases need to be carefully vetted and lawyers need to be aware of all the potential pitfalls.