|
Paris v Stepney Borough Council (1950) BC [1951] HL
Tort, negligence, duty of care, reasonableness of precautions,
special duty of care.
Facts
A Local Authority employed Mr Paris as a garage mechanic. Mr Paris
had lost the sight of one eye during the war. In order to loosen a
stiff bolt he struck it with a hammer; a piece of metal flew off and
(because he was not wearing goggles) struck him in his good eye,
causing him to become totally blind. After the accident, Mr Paris
successfully claimed damages for his injury but this was overturned
on appeal. Mr Paris then appealed to the House of Lords.
The Decision
The probability of such an event was very small, but its
consequences were very serious, his employers, knowing of his
disability, should have taken extra care to provide goggles for him.
The more serious the possible damage, the greater the precautions
that should be taken. Stepney Borough Council owed a special duty of
care to P and had been negligent in failing to supply him with
goggles, even though sufficient equipment was not given to other
employees.
Held, Mr Paris won
Note
Mr Paris worked in the Borough Council's trucks maintenance garage.
He had been blinded in one eye during the war but had successfully
managed to conceal this from his employers until he was examined by
a doctor for the purposes of the Council's superannuation scheme.
When it came to light that he was blind in one eye he was given two
weeks notice of dismissal. The accident happened two days before he
was due to leave.
Its worth remembering this is 1950's in terms of employment law
Full text
external link |