• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

This essay will obtain and discuss the legal obligations and regulations of the company, and whether the company adhered to these regulations or where the company did not meet set health and safety (H&S) guidelines.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Introduction A member of a leisure company was injured when some poorly stacked equipment toppled and struck him. The equipment had been stacked by a member of staff who had previously been warned for carelessness and ignoring proper procedures. This essay will obtain and discuss the legal obligations and regulations of the company, and whether the company adhered to these regulations or where the company did not meet set health and safety (H&S) guidelines. For the remainder of this essay the injured party will be referred to as "the member" or the "plaintiff" (the person making the claim), the employee who poorly stacked the boxes will be referred to as "the employee" and the leisure company will be referred to as "the company". The company may be liable to civil action as they were responsible for the equipment fallen on the member. This accident may leave the company liable to both a civil and criminal court case. The offences (failure to comply with any regulations made under Act) may be tried summarily at the magistrates court or on indictment in the crown court. The burden of proof is different in criminal and civil cases, in criminal cases the prosecution has to prove the defendant was guilty beyond reasonable doubt, in a civil case the claimant (the member) has to prove that he was owed a duty of care and that this duty of care was breached. ...read more.

Middle

The actions that occurred could have breached the following torts: tort of negligence, tort of breach of statutory duty or the tort of vicarious liability. Under tort law the negligence of the company or the employee may have been unintentional but it is still a tort. For the tort of negligence proof of negligence must be shown and the duty of care by the plaintiff must be defined. Section 47 (2) states "Breach of duty imposed by health and safety regulations shall, so far as it causes damage, be actionable except in so far as the regulations provide otherwise". (Smith et al., 1993. p 25). In a claim for negligence it is necessary for the member to show: 1). The company owed him a duty of care, 2). That the company was in breach of that duty, 3). That as a result of the breach the member suffered damage. (Goodman, 1988). In a claim for negligence it must be considered whether a duty of care existed. Once the existence has been established, the question of breach turns to whether the defendant exercised the degree of skill and care in the performance of the tortious duty. If the defendant's duty was only to protect the plaintiff against personal injury or physical damage, then that kind of damage must be inflicted in order to complete the tort of negligence. (Jackson & Powell, 1992). ...read more.

Conclusion

(HSE-Databases.co.uk, 2002b). In the first case the defendant had been negligent which led to the child having the accident, whereas it was the employee's negligence caused the accident in the leisure company rather than the management. In the second case it was a lack of supervision, which led to the death of the child. Had the management of the company been better supervising the employee or the injured member the accident may not have occurred. Conclusion This essay has shown that a many number of acts and regulations have been broken. With more information on the case the court would either find the company and / or guilty of not meeting the said regulations set out in the acts. The company could be made liable through the health and Safety executive for criminal and / or the member for civil action for the injuries sustained. If the company was made liable for the act of the employee (under vicarious liability) they would be able to claim from that such other contribution which could be found by the court to be just and equitable having regarded the extent of the employee's responsibility for the damage in question, from the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act, 1978 sections 1&2. (Goodman, 1988). This means the company could claim that the employee knew how to do his job properly and he ignored proper procedures, which then led to the accident taking place. So if the court agreed with this claim the employee would be required to pay the company the money they had to pay out to the injured member. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Tort Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Tort Law essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    'The existence of a duty of care is ultimately a question of policy'. Discuss.

    4 star(s)

    seem that in other areas, there is a wider scope for which to determine or establish a duty of care. There are categories which caters for proximity which may arise between two people such as the duty of care imposed on a parent towards a child or the duty of care imposed on a rescuer to aid a drowning person.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Problem question on Occupiers liability Act 1957

    3 star(s)

    for private nuisance towards Max and other neighbours whose vegetation were killed by the fumes. It may be tempting to suggest that Lucy can be held liable for the damage caused to Oliver's car as her failure to do anything about the petrol substitute in her garden caused the fumes to spread, which in turn damaged Oliver's car.

  1. Duty of Care.

    plaintiff to have relied on the defendant to exercise due skill and care, in respect of such conduct. Mutual Life & Citizens' Assurance Co. Ltd v Evatt [1971] UKPC The minority held that when an enquirer consults a businessman in the course of his business and makes it plain to

  2. To succeed in a negligence action in tort, the claimant must prove three things

    The third requirement of the rule is that the thing must escape. A case that shows this is Read v. J. Lyons Ltd (1947), it was held, as there had been no escape of the thing that inflicted the injury, Rylands and Fletcher became inapplicable.

  1. Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd [2002].

    "causing" polluting matter to enter water when the polluting matter was released from the defendant's property by the deliberate intervention of an unknown person). We agree that these cases illustrate that what is fair, just and reasonable plays a role in shaping the law on causation.

  2. In the generality of personal injury actions, it is of course true that ...

    negligence case.23 The fact simply, where Mr Fairchild, have to cut asbestos sheets for roofing on the factory carried out his work with different employers has inhaled dusts that causing him mesothelioma. In the recent House of Lord decision with the absence of strong medical evidence in which even a

  1. Defamation - it will be interesting to make compare the defamation law in the ...

    in London a year later, and that MI6 was involved in a plot to assassinate the Libyan leader, Muammar Gadafy, in 1995. The defence of Mr. Shayler was based on the freedom of expression and public interest. He was charged under the Official Secrets Act 1989 which prohibited any member

  2. Tort Law Essay . The purpose of this essay will be to advise on ...

    Belle could claim loss of amenity due to her inability to now breed and show her dogs, see also Lim Poh Choo on this point. The devices for calculating future losses are the multiplier & multiplicand. The multiplier refers to number of years and the multiplicand regards the annual loss.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work