Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
szone  
#1 Posted : 08 November 2013 11:21:29(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
szone

Section 47 of The Health and Safety at Work Etc Act 1974 has been amended. It is now only possible for a civil claim to take place if the complainant can prove the employer has been negligent. Can someone please clarify this please as I think I have the wrong end of the stick. Does this mean the organisation has to be prosecuted under the HASAW act first before and civil action can take place ?
Canopener  
#2 Posted : 08 November 2013 12:25:33(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Canopener

You do have the wrong end of the stick a bit. Being prosecuted under HASAWA is NOT a prerequisite for someone taking a civil action and never has been. In simple terms, and I am sure someone will correct me, the amendment to S47 is such that the previous action of breach of statutory duty of those regulations made under the act is no longer available (unless the regulation specifically allows this). Any future action must now be as the result of negligence only.
Phil Grace  
#3 Posted : 08 November 2013 13:24:04(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Phil Grace

Canopener is correct. The basis for a civil claim for compensation must now, in the future, be based upon an allegation of negligence. Thus the cliamant must prove: There was a duty of care owed to them (no problem for an employer/employee scenario) There was a breach of the duty That the breach of duty resulted in injury or damage and That the outcome was foreeseable. It will not be possible for the claimant to allege that there was a breach of statutory duty. BUT I would suggest that claimant's solicitors will seek to use the evidence that the employer was prosecuted as proof that there was an element of wrong doing, that there was a failure to take reasonable steps etc. But only time will tell. Phil
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.