The result from this case in similar to other cases that have been heard in the courts. Basically to be able to use Reg 3 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations to bring a claim against an employer you don’t just have to prove that a ‘suitable and sufficient’ risks assessment was absent but (this is the key bit which people miss out) that the accident was a directly caused by the lack of this assessment. In this case, no evidence was provided that had an assessment been in place the injury would not have happened. This is not new, which begs the question why whenever a claim is sent to an employer the first question that is asked is always ‘is there a risk assessment for this activity?’

I've frequently noticed that the Scottish courts tend to use common sense.

There is a specific department of the Scottish legal system that handles matters relating to health and safety. Guessing that's why there are better and informed judgements.