Caswell v Powell Duffryn Associated Colleries [1940] AC 152, HL 1939

Citation:Caswell v Powell Duffryn Associated Colleries [1940] AC 152, HL 1939

No link - library research required.

Rule of thumb:If one employee makes a bad mistake and fails to do a check of machinery which they were trained to do, and this leads to another employee being injured, is the employer liable for this? Yes, the employer is vicariously liable for the mistake of the employee and the fact that training was not followed is irrelevant.

Background facts:

The facts of this case were that an employee was cleaning a coal transportation conveyor belt. Another employee was supposed to have turned this off before the cleaning started but failed to do so.

Parties argued:

The employers argued that they had trained the employees in order to be able to do this, and it was not their fault when the employees completely abdicated their duties.

Judgment:

It was held that suitable checks, double checks and signals were not introduced sufficiently into the system to provide ‘safety nets’ to protect it as strongly as possible against human errors and mix-ups, and therefore the employer was held liable, with only contributory negligence by the employee. The Court also affirmed the subjective element of the duty of care in this case played a factor in their decision making. They affirmed that where more serious injuries or illnesses could be suffered, this required a higher level of care, and essentially affirmed the inverse of this that where the consequences are potentially lower then the checks do not need to be as high.

Ratio-decidendi:

‘To succeed in an action based on negligence, whether against a doctor or otherwise, it is of course necessary to establish a breach of that duty to take care which the law requires, and the degree of want of care which constitutes negligence must vary with the circumstances’, Lord Wright at 175-176

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.