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
Admin  
#1 Posted : 14 February 2002 10:54:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Malcolm I work for a further education establishment, and have been approached by a lecturer that works at an out-reach centre. The church in which she works has asked her and all the students she teaches to sign a decrlaration that, they accept the church has no responsibility should an accident take place. I am looking for information on the legal standpoint of any such declaration.
Admin  
#2 Posted : 14 February 2002 11:48:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Laurie Surely the Church can no more opt out of H&S legislation, and Occupiers Liability, than anyone else, can they? Laurie
Admin  
#3 Posted : 14 February 2002 12:24:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By John Webster It matters not how many notices, declarations or other disclaimers there are, signed or otherwise. If there is a statutory obligation or a duty of care they are worthless. How many times do you see signs that tell you that "The management/owners/operators/proprietors accept no responsibility for any loss, injury or damage however caused etc etc..." Sometimes they are produced out of ignorance, as is probably the case with your church. Mostly they are an attempt to frighten away potential claims. Quite simply, if you have certain rights, and/or protection under the law, you cannot, even by signing a disclaimer, exempt yourself (and thereby deny others in your charge that protection). If you are an organisation using the premises of another, there should be a proper agreement drawn up. Most organisations, including churches, have standard forms for hall letting etc which are drawn up by their "head office"
Admin  
#4 Posted : 14 February 2002 12:47:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Nick Higginson Malcolm, I agree with the other 2 respondants. An employer/occupier can not opt out of their statutory or common law duties by asking people to sign a disclaimer. I have seen notices on blackpool pier and pub playgrounds saying that occupiers are not liable for injuries sustained, and I suggest that these have the same legal standing as the churches disclaimer i.e. none. If the church fails in its duties, it is liable - end of story. Regards, Nick
Admin  
#5 Posted : 14 February 2002 21:12:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By David J Bristow Hi Malcolm Signing a form would not be worth the paper it is written on (pardon the pun) - unfair contract! and as the respondents have stated the church cannot opt out of health and safety nor the duty of care owed under common law. Regards David B
Admin  
#6 Posted : 14 February 2002 23:36:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Nigel Singleton BSc Legal standpoint: The Health & safety at Work Act 1974 states: Section 3:General duties of employers and self-employed to persons other than their employees 3(1) Every employer shall conduct his undertaking so that persons not in their employment who may be affected are not exposed to risks. Sec 4: General duties of persons in charge of premises to persons other than their employees 4(1) Imposes a duty on persons in charge of premises (e.g. sports complex) to non employees who use a non-domestic premises provided as a place of work or as a place where they may use plant or substances. 4(2) Each person having control of such premises must see that as far as is reasonably practicable, there is no risk to the health and safety of people who use the premises.
Admin  
#7 Posted : 15 February 2002 13:01:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ralph Ellington It's the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 that is relevant here. Under this Act a person cannot restrict liability for death or personal injury by a term in a contract or by displaying a notice. Ralph
Admin  
#8 Posted : 15 February 2002 15:11:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Allan St.John Holt I'm sure all the above comments are correct - but it's more difficult when it comes to property dmaage such as a car break-in. That probably does fall into the group of what liability can be excluded? Allan
Admin  
#9 Posted : 21 February 2002 16:03:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Nick Higginson I can add something else to this as I'm just studying the subject for Dip 2. It is indeed the Unfair Contract Terms Act which applies. Clauses in respect of personal injury have no legal standing whatsoever (with regard to places used for "business" activities), and clauses in respect of property damage are subject to the test of reasonableness. Hope this helps, Nick
Users browsing this topic
Guest (3)
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.