Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court dismisses personal injuries claim made by Wheatfield prisoner who suffered a traumatic amputation to the fingers of his left hand while using a GEKA Minicrop sheer and punch machine in the metal welding workshop of the prison, on the grounds that the plaintiff has failed to satisfy the Court on the balance of probabilities that the accident occurred in the way, manner and circumstances described in evidence, notwithstanding that there were breaches of health and safety legislation in the prison.
Prison law – negligence – plaintiff prisoner suffered a traumatic amputation to the fingers of his left hand while using a GEKA Minicrop sheer and punch machine in the metal welding workshop of the prison – evidential conflict between the parties concerning and surrounding the circumstances of the accident, particularly with regard to precisely how the Plaintiff sustained his injuries while using the GEKA – whether training of prisoners ought to have been on a one to one basis – post accident investigations – assessment of the plaintiff – effect of Methadone/Illicit Drugs – drugs ingested by the Plaintiff played no material role in the cause of the accident – there was no good reason why the Plaintiff should not have been admitted to the workshop on the day – did the plaintiff get an instruction not to go near or use the machine – plaintiff was not responsible for the removal of the guide-guard – Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act, 2005 – Safety, Health and Welfare (General Applications) Regulations, 2007 – ex turpi causa non oritur actio – plaintiff has failed to satisfy the Court on the balance of probabilities that the accident occurred in the way, manner and circumstances described in evidence – plaintiff's claim dismissed.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.