Health and safety

A useful reminder from the EAT that where automatic unfairness and health and safety is involved, it is the employee’s belief as to the existence of a health and safety issue which is important – not whether such an issue did in fact exist in law.

The fact that an employer did not believe there was a situation of ‘serious and imminent’ danger did not prevent an employee’s dismissal from being automatically unfair. For a health and safety dismissal to be automatically unfair, an employee must simply hold an honest and reasonable belief that such a danger existed – the fact that the employer may disagree with the employee is irrelevant.

Companies cannot be sued by staff injured when using equipment not provided or maintained by their employer. The House of Lords ruled against a care worker who tried to sue her employer after she was injured when a ramp (at the home of a person she was caring for) caused her to fall - even though the ramp had not been installed by the council for whom she worked.

The Court of Appeal held that two employers can both be vicariously liable for the negligence of an employee.

The House of Lords has ruled that a widow of a man who killed himself 6 years after an industial accident should be compensated by his former employer. Following a serious injury at work Mr Corr suffered depression and eventually, six years after the accident, committed suicide.

Ms Allison was a driver on London Underground and also a trainer of other drivers. She suffered severe shoulder strain and damage to her thumb as a result of having to use the traction brake controller (TBC) to drive a train.