Wardlaw v Bonnington Castings Ltd, 1956 SLT 135
Citation: Wardlaw v Bonnington Castings Ltd, 1956 SLT 135
Rule of thumb: If there is exposure to dust in a workplace, should face-coverings be provided? Yes, and an organisation can be liable for this even years later as it often takes many years for the damage caused by this to become apparent.
Judgment:
Where someone has carried out a practice that does not take precautions against certain diseases or injuries in the future, then this is deemed to be a material contribution, regardless of how many times it has been done, and the level required to make a material contribution is not particularly high, ‘It appears to me that the source of this disease was the dust from both sources, and the real question is whether the dust from the sling grinders materially contributed to the disease. What is a material contribution must be a question of degree. A contribution which comes within the exception of de minimis non curat lex is not material, but I think that any contribution which does not fall within the exception must be material. I do not see how there can be something too large to come within the de minimis principle, but yet too small to be material’, Lord Reid
Warning: This is not professional legal advice. This is not professional legal education advice. Please obtain professional guidance before embarking on any legal course of action. This is just an interpretation of a Judgment by persons of legal insight & varying levels of legal specialism, experience & expertise. Please read the Judgment yourself and form your own interpretation of it with professional assistance.