header-logo header-logo

Health and Safety

26 February 2009
Issue: 7358 / Categories: Case law , Terms&conditions , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-detail

Couzens v T McGee & Co Ltd (now McGee Group Ltd) [2009] EWCA Civ 95, [2009] All ER (D) 191 (Feb)

If an item of equipment which has not been supplied by the employer is being used at work, it will not be “work equipment” for the purposes of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (SI 1998/2306) unless the employer expressly or impliedly permitted its use or must be deemed to have permitted its use. Express permission will be a matter for direct evidence. Implicit permission may be inferred from evidence that the respondent was aware that the item was being used and did nothing to stop it.

Issue: 7358 / Categories: Case law , Terms&conditions , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll