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

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Serious injury teambolstered by high-profile partner hire

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Firm strengthens employment team with partner hire

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

Lawyers’ liability practice strengthened with partner appointment in London

NEWS
Ceri Morgan, knowledge counsel at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP, analyses the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd, which reshapes the law of fiduciary relationships and common law bribery
The boundaries of media access in family law are scrutinised by Nicholas Dobson in NLJ this week
Reflecting on personal experience, Professor Graham Zellick KC, Senior Master of the Bench and former Reader of the Middle Temple, questions the unchecked power of parliamentary privilege
Geoff Dover, managing director at Heirloom Fair Legal, sets out a blueprint for ethical litigation funding in the wake of high-profile law firm collapses
James Grice, head of innovation and AI at Lawfront, explores how artificial intelligence is transforming the legal sector
back-to-top-scroll