title of presentation goes here name of presenter date · presentation – 01. health & safety...

IIRSM Qatar 20th February 2018

Presented by:

Balamurugan A

Before we start

CROWNE PLAZA SAFETY ORIENTATION VIDEO

Welcome & Announcements

Welcome to: -

All of our members and visitors, especially those attending for the first time;

Representatives of our sponsor DISS;

Our guest participants: Viv & Roque

Sponsor participants: Robert Wafula

Agenda 01. Legal Focus – The Law behind the Regulations - Mr. Viv

02. Presentation – 01. Health & Safety Culture – Mr. Robert

03. Lessons Learned – Mr. Viv

04. Networking:

Introductions

Networking Topic – Case Study discussion

05. Presentation – 02. Permit to Work – Mr. Roque

06. Other Business

Legal Focus

Viv Turner

The Law behind the Regulations Health and Safety Case Law

The Law behind the Regulations

Tell me and I may forget,

show me and I may remember,

involve me and I will understand.

Confucius


Health and Safety has been around for

centuries – the ‘Duty of Care’ dates back to

at least 1066 (and probably long before

that).

Parliaments/Governing Bodies implement

legislation (and subordinate regulations),

but it is the Judges that interpret their

meaning/objective.


Negligence

The landmark case of Donoghue v

Stevenson (1932) established a number of

elements in Negligence.

A person was injured after drinking a bottle

of ginger beer that contained a slug.

The Court (House of Lords) established: -


Negligence

Negligence is the failure to take care

(through your acts or omissions) not to

damage the person or property of

another.

To prove negligence the following

standard conditions must be satisfied: -


Negligence

• that a duty of care was owed (the neighbour test);

• that the duty was broken;

• that the loss was as a direct result of the breach of

the duty.

It also established the Extent of Duty of Care as

being: -


Negligence

• proximity – how close/far someone is from

the potential hazard/risk;

• reasonableness – the assessment of risk

(magnitude x likelihood);

• foreseeability – could the outcome have

been foreseeable (predicted) by any

reasonable person.


Reasonableness

The landmark case of Paris v Stepney

Borough Council (1951) further defined the

scope of Reasonableness.

A worker with only one eye was blinded by

a rusted metal chip, his employer said it was

not usual to provide goggles for the type of

work the IP was undertaking.


Reasonableness

The Court ruled that: -

• the Duty of Care had been breached by not

providing suitable PPE;

• that the magnitude of risk was greater for

the IP;

• individual needs must be taken account of (think of young persons and pregnant women).


Reasonable Care (employer to employee)

• Wilson & Clyde Coal Co. V English (1938)

• An employee was injured when some plant was

set in motion whilst he was leaving a mine.

Wilson’s & Clyde Coal Co. had employed an

agent responsible for mine safety. The House of

Lords ruled that an employer can delegate

performance but not responsibility and that

employers must take reasonable care to provide


Reasonable Care (employer to employee)

• Wilson & Clyde Coal Co. V English (1938) cont.

• Proper and safe plant and appliances for work

• A safe system of work with adequate

supervision and instruction

• Safe premises (including access and egress)

• Competent staff of fellow employees


Reasonably Practicable

• Marshall V Gotham & Co. Ltd (1954)

• A mine roof collapsed killing a number of men

(including Marshall). The duty to make the roof

secure was not found to be absolute, but a

qualified one “so far as is reasonably practicable”

and found in favour of Gotham & Co.

• Since this ruling courts will not hold that

something is not “reasonably practicable” if it

is shown to be practicable.


Absolute Duty

• Summer & Sons V Frost (1955)

• A worker at a grindstone injured his thumb when it came

into contact with the stone (the guard was not sufficient).

He brought an action against his employer for breach of

a statutory duty to fence dangerous parts.

• The case was appealed and on appeal it was found in

favour of Frost as the court held that the danger was

reasonably foreseeable and there had been no

contributory negligence.


Absolute Duty

• Summer & Sons V Frost (1955) cont.

• It also established that it was an Absolute Duty

to guard dangerous parts of machines and that

where this was not possible use should be

prohibited.

• A secure fence is where the presence of such a

fence make it no longer dangerous to be used.


Absolute Duty

• Summer & Sons V Frost (1955) cont.

• It is enough to show a part to be dangerous by the

mere fact of an accident, the test is that before the

accident that such an outcome was reasonably

foreseeable.

• A part of a machine may be dangerous although it

may only be so to a careless or inattentive

operator.


Absolute Duty

• Uddin V Associated Portland Cement (1965).

• A worker entered into an unauthorised area (to catch a

pigeon) and was injured.

• He took proceeding against the company for breach of an

statutory (absolute) duty to guard dangerous

machinery/parts which was upheld.

• However the company’s defence with regard to his

injury was Contributory Negligence which was also

upheld and 80% of the blame (for the injury)

apportioned to Mr Uddin.


And it still happens…….

Legal Focus

The law exists because people have had accident, to try and prevent history

repeating itself

Legal Focus

Any questions?

Agenda # 2

Presentation 01 – H&S Culture – Mr. Robert

Agenda # 3

Local Accident & Lessons Learned – Mr. Viv

Agenda # 4

Networking

4a. Timeline Exercise

Volunteers can take 2-3 mintues each topic.

First I will then visit each “decade”, and give you a topic

Agenda # 5

Presentation 02 – Permit to Work (PTW)

Agenda 6

Other Business

(now is the time to raise questions from work)

Other Business

Other Business

Oyebande Waheed Takou Evariste Mehboob Reza Ajibade Lateef

Upcoming Events and Meetings

March 20 (Tuesday) IIRSM Meeting – Crowne Plaza Hotel


March 01 Gulf Expo – t.b.d 19-21 International Sustainable Energy Conference - DECC 20 IIRSM Meeting – Crowne Plaza Hotel 25-26 International Conference on Environment – Mercure Grand Hotel


2018 28 April – UN World Day for Safety & Health at Work 06-07th MAY – Qatar HSE & Fire Safety Conference - Marriott Marquis City Centre Hotel 05 June – UN World Environment Day

A Word of Thanks

To our sponsor DISS for support of the branch for the first quarter of this year.

Thanks to Viv, Robert and Roque for their participation

To all of you, our members and visitors, for making the effort to attend and support IIRSM.

title of presentation goes here name of presenter date · presentation – 01. health & safety...

Documents