Case Studies
Employers Liability - Accidents at Work
Below is a virtual case, similar to many Employer Liability cases that we are currently undertaking at Malcomson Law. This is not a real case and no real names are used in this article as we believe it will breach our client's confidentiality.
Name: Michael Ahern
Sex: Male
Age: 34
Marital Status: Single
Occupation: Assistant Fitter
Michael Ahern's story
Mr Ahern, the plaintiff, was employed as an assistant fitter. Part of his duties involved cutting pieces of steel. Michael was required to use a hand held grinder to undertake this task. The grinder was defective and as a result of that defect the Michael sustained a personal injury to his left hand.
The grinder had a piece missing. This meant that Michael had to place both hands on the body of the machine when he was using the grinder. When the machine was activated, the grinding disc spun, catching Michael's glove and pulling his thumb into the grinder. Michael sustained a serious injury to his non dominant left thumb which severed the nerve in the thumb.
Legal Advice
It was clear that his employers were at fault for the accident as they failed to employ a proper system of inspection and maintenance of work equipment. The hand held grinder had been defective for approx one month. Work equipment was signed out from the work stores on a daily basis. The defendant's Expert Engineer conceded that the defendant's inspection and maintenance system lapsed in the months before the accident.
Allegations of contributory negligence were made against Michael for:
-Using the defective grinder
-Failing to wear heavier cotton gloves
-Failing to follow his training
All allegations of contributory negligence, i.e., that the plaintiff was at fault for the accident, were denied as the employer has a duty to inspect and maintain work equipment. The employer had a maintenance and inspection system in place but had allowed this system to lapse. It was well known on the shop floor that this piece of equipment was defective, however, it was the only one of its kind available for the type of job that Michael was doing at the time of the accident. His fellow colleagues were also using the defective grinder on a daily basis.
Heavier cotton gloves were available but they would not have protected Michael from sustaining the injury to his thumb. These gloves are only designed to protect workers from sparks from the grinder and not in relation to preventing an injury of this nature.
Michael's training was irrelevant in the circumstances of this accident.
What happened?
Michael proceeded with his claim all the way to the High Court. His case was settled on the day of the hearing at the door to the court.
Michael sustained a serious injury to his left thumb. This injury required an operation to repair the nerve. This involved taking a graft from his foot and placing it in his thumb. As a result, he was left with decreased sensitivity, a burning sensation in his thumb and reduced power and grip.
In addition, the injury affected Michael's career and chances of promotion into the future.
Please note that this article is for information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Seeking Employment Law Advice
If you would like to set up a consultation with an Employment Law Solicitor please contact Malcomson Law by calling 01 8744422.
This news section contains stories of interest from publicly available news sources. Where we are representing the clients referred to in the news material we will say so. Where we do not represent individuals or bodies mentioned or quoted, the inclusion of the news story in our news section is not intended nor should it be taken to imply that we act for the individual or body concerned.