Posted By Chris Jerman We have to get away from the idea that injury (any loss) is followed by liability. There is a middle stage in this relating to negligence. Which is in turn linked to reasonable foreseeability and competency. If your company has done everything that it should in order to cover everything that's reasonably foreseeable and can prove it - where's the negligence? If the disease (whatever) comes totally left field, where's the reasonableness? Hence, probably no liability. If the medic (bit general) doesn't follow the guidance (ie application of their competency) despite being supervised etc - I'd be knocking on their door - assuming that they survive. This stuff has to be argued out in light of the facts and giving general answers is tricky. In short a breach needs to be a negligent breach and not simply there's been injury ergo there's liability.

Posted By Chris Jerman Thanks for bringing such a vision to my Friday afternoon, John. Glad I don't have your job. Incidentally I work for your name's sake -John Lewis! Sounds like there needs to be a training needs analysis and competency upgrade. I've always said that you can lead a hippy to water, but you can't make him wash. Best of luck.

Posted By Michael Hosking As you say and from my past experience in hospital morgues, the control measures have been in place for many years, though the medical people tend to call it:control of infection. It is mainly a case of training and PPE and even though they are foreigners they have a duty to co-operate and it has to be the hard line of here is the PPE and if you do not wear it you do not work here.