When Experience Matters

Get in touch

Contact Us

Injury caused by slipping Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 Negligence and breach of statutory duty Adequate training Risk assessment Sufficient care

Injury caused by slipping Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 Negligence and breach of statutory duty Adequate training Risk assessment Sufficient care

Personal injury - Injury caused by slipping - Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 - Negligence and breach of statutory duty - Adequate training - Risk assessment - Sufficient care 

Facts: The plaintiff brought an action for negligence and breach of statutory duty against the defendant after the plaintiff had fallen to the ground and got injured in the course of his duty as a fire fighter. The plaintiff contended that the defendant was negligent and in breach of the statutory duty as imposed under the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005. The plaintiff alleged failure by the defendant to provide adequate training in case of oil spillage and that the defendant had failed to produce any specific risk assessment in relation to the danger faced by the fire fighters by slipping due to the presence of oil on the soles of the boots. The defendant denied the liability on the basis that the plaintiff was an experienced fire fighter who had dealt with oil spillages in the past. The defendant submitted that the plaintiff was provided with adequate training. The defendant contended that the accident occurred as the plaintiff had failed to take sufficient care.
Held: Mr. Justice Barr dismissed the plaintiff’s action against the defendant. The Court held that the accident was not due to the negligence or breach of duty by the defendant. The Court held that the plaintiff, as a fire fighter and instructor, was well aware of the risk of slipping in case of oil spillage and thus, there was failure by the plaintiff to take sufficient care. The Court further found that the plaintiff was well aware of the risks posed by oil contamination of the boots and any specific risk assessment in that regard was not necessary. The Court held that the defendant conformed to the standards generally applicable in the industry in manufacturing and designing of the fire tender and provided proper training to the plaintiff in relation to the correct method of ascending into or descending from the cab of a fire tender.
Fitzell, Arthur v South Tipperary County Council
25/10/2016 No. 2013/9910 P [206] IEHC 590