header-logo header-logo

Who carries the can?

17 April 2014 / Robert O'Leary
Issue: 7603 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Robert O’Leary returns to the subject of who bears the risk for a working prisoner’s negligence

Who should bear the risk if a working prisoner negligently injures a member of the prison staff (or, for that matter, another working prisoner)?

In Cox v MoJ [2014] EWCA Civ 132, [2014] All ER (D) 183 (Feb) the claimant (C) was the catering department manager at HMP Swansea. The population of over 400 inmates was fed with meals prepared in the prison kitchen. The catering department comprised four members of staff and 20 prisoners who assisted in the preparation of food and in the delivery of goods from suppliers into the stores. During one such delivery, someone dropped a sack of rice. C, having instructed the prisoners to stop what they were doing, knelt beside the broken sack to prevent its contents spilling into a walkway. As she was doing so, a prisoner (P) tried to pass her carrying two 25kg sacks and stumbled, dropping them and injuring the claimant. By the appeal it was not in dispute

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

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