Posted By Simon Marshall Hello A worker suffered a broken arm after helping to clear out a side office which was filled with unstable furniture/ trolleys/ cages/ and other miscellanous items. (the room was literally filled floor to ceiling with these items and was being used for temp storage) The worker was hired from a temp agency and classed as a manual handler (lifter and shifter) As the room was being cleared a stack of furniture fell hitting him and broke his arm. The worker is in the process of putting a claim in for his injury. Im trying to figure which specific reg was broken. I know alot of claims come under section 2(1) of the HASAWA. But am trying to figure any other breached regs..I was thinking maybe section 13 of the welfare regs (falls and falling objects)as the ACOP for this reg does talk about safe stacking and storage. By the way the worker was trained,there were training records, there was a risk assessment in place, anf the worker was instructed to take care due to the hazardous nature of the room

Posted By Simon Marshall Thanks...also thanks for reminding me about section 2 ..cheers

Posted By Simon Marshall There was a genric MH risk assessment and SWP in place, the temp employee was also inducted and trained on the exsisting RA and SWP...I think they should have actually reviewed the RA/ SWP due to the nature of the task though..theres def several failings

Posted By Simon Marshall I know a claim is coming our way..altough I supose the actually employer still has their responsiblity to consider..

Posted By water67. Hi, claim will be based on your failure to comply with common law duty of care. your failure to complete a specific risk assessment for this scenario, unless your generic was very robust, may make it difficult to defend. the level of manual handling training given to this individual may also cause you concern.. may have to bite the bullet on this one and pay up.. Cheers.

Posted By Ronofcam I think you’re barking up the wrong tree with trying to work out which legislation is applicable to a civil claim. All a claimant has to establish for the tort of negligence is that a duty of care was owed to that claimant, the duty of care was breached through negligence, and that the negligence resulted in the loss/injury. If the claimant decided to sue for a breach of statutory duty then that’s different, but – personally – I feel that it would be easier for them to sue for negligence. The burden of proof is slightly more onerous in this regard, but the two are broadly similar. I suspect, though, that the specific regulation that has been breached is the Manual Handling Regs, where the risk assessment may be deemed to be insufficient.

Posted By Peter Tanczos Possible breaches of Workplace (H,S&Welfare) Reg 9 (cleanliness & waste materials)Reg 12 (Condition of Floors & TRAFFIC ROUTES) Reg 13 (Falls or Falling Objects) was rescinded by the Work at Height Regs 10&11 (Falling objects)