Summary of Recent Cases – Substantive Law


PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT AT WORK REGULATIONS 1992
On 15.05.12, the Court of Appeal gave judgment allowing the Claimant’s appeal in Blair v Chief Constable of Sussex Police [2012] EWCA Civ 633, 156 Sol Jo (no 20) 31 CA. The Claimant was a police officer who argued that he should have been issued with motocross boots rather than Alt-berg boots when taking part in off-road motorcycle training. The Court of Appeal held that a structured approach had to be taken when applying the Personal Protective Equipment Regulations 1992. First, it was necessary to identify the risk of injury. The next question was whether the equipment in fact provided was, so far as practicable, effective to prevent or adequately control the risk. If the equipment was effective, or it was not practicable to make it effective, only then was it relevant to consider whether the equipment was appropriate within Regulation 4(3)(a) or to take account of ergonomic requirements or the Claimant’s state of health within Regulation 4(3)(b). Threlfall v Hull City Council [2010] EWCA Civ 1147 applied.

June 19, 2012 · Editorial Team · Comments Closed
Posted in: Cases