This week the Court of Appeal presided over the case of Baker and Others v Quantum Clothing and Others. This case concerned the liability of an employer in the knitting industry of Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire for employees’ loss of hearing caused by exposure to noise at a lower level than was previously recognised as giving rise to liability.
The contention put forward by the claimants’ was that the safety of a place of work should be judged entirely objectively and not by whether or not the injuries were reasonably foreseeable. This was originally rejected at trial, with the court suggesting that the standard of safety under the Factories Act 1921 section 29 was governed by the general standard which it ought to be reasonable for employers to adopt at the relevant time.
However, Lady Justice Smith said that Judge Inglis, who judged the original trial, erred and that the test for whether a working environment was made and kept safe was to be perceived objectively.
It seems from this judgement that what amounts to a safe working environment needs to be constantly evaluated and reassessed by an employer and as such is an ongoing concern. This puts a higher burden on the employer and increases the duty of care and therefore from the perspective of those who have suffered an injury through an accident at work it appears to increase the possibility of their chances of success.
