The incident

Mr J, a 60-year-old welder/fabricator employed by Edwards Engineering, was working at Cedar Maltings, a site owned and managed by Muntons PLC. Mr J was coming down a ladder, and as he stepped off the bottom rung he stumbled backwards and fell into an uncovered drain. As a result, he suffered:

• A complex fracture to his lower left leg and ankle.
• Injuries to his elbow and head.

Employers’ liability: Edwards Engineering (Perth) Ltd

As Mr J’s employer, Edwards Engineering had a legal duty to ensure his health and safety, even when he was working off-site. Their liability arises under:

• Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 (HSWA), Section 2: Edwards Engineering was required to take reasonable steps to protect Mr J’s safety, which includes ensuring his working environment on third-party premises was safe.
• Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 (MHSWR), Regulation 3 (Risk Assessment): Edwards Engineering should have conducted or verified risk assessments for the work environment at Cedar Maltings. An uncovered drain was a foreseeable hazard.
• MHSWR, Regulation 11 (Cooperation and Coordination): As Mr J was working on Muntons PLC’s premises, Edwards Engineering had a responsibility to liaise with the occupier to ensure safety measures were in place.

While Edwards Engineering may not have been directly responsible for the uncovered drain, their failure to adequately assess the risks and coordinate with Muntons PLC contributed to the incident.

Occupiers’ liability: Muntons PLC

Muntons PLC, as the owner and occupier of Cedar Maltings, also had a legal duty to ensure the safety of visitors like Mr J under:

• Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957, Section 2(2): Muntons PLC owed Mr J, a lawful visitor, a duty of care to ensure he was "reasonably safe" while on their premises. The uncovered drain constituted a clear breach of this duty.
• Workplace (Health, Safety, and Welfare) Regulations 1992, Regulation 12: Floors and traffic routes must be safe and free from hazards. An uncovered drain in a workplace environment represented a significant danger that Muntons PLC failed to address.

Additionally, by not identifying and mitigating the risk posed by the uncovered drain, Muntons PLC breached their duty to maintain a safe premises.

How shared liability was determined

Mr J’s accident resulted from failures by both Edwards Engineering and Muntons PLC. Edwards Engineering failed to assess or manage risks associated with the workplace. While Muntons PLC neglected their duty as an occupier to maintain safe conditions for visitors, including employees of contractors. Together, these lapses created the unsafe environment that led to Mr J’s injuries.

Key takeaways for employers and occupiers

This case serves as a reminder of the importance of shared responsibility for workplace safety:

For employers:

• Conduct thorough risk assessments for off-site work environments.
• Establish clear lines of communication and coordination with third-party occupiers.

For occupiers:

• Regularly inspect and maintain premises to eliminate hazards.
• Understand your legal obligations to ensure the safety of all visitors, including contractor employees.

Conclusion

The accident involving Mr J underscores how lapses by both employers and occupiers can contribute to workplace injuries. Both Edwards Engineering and Muntons PLC failed to meet their respective duties, resulting in a shared liability.

This case highlights the critical need for cooperation and vigilance in maintaining safe work environments, particularly when employees work on third-party premises.

If you’ve been injured either in your own place of work or while working at someone else’s premises, you may be entitled to compensation. Contact us to see how we can help.