PUWER liability

Spencer-Franks v Kellogg Brown & Root Ltd and others [2008] UKHL 46

The House of Lords, overturning the decision of the Scottish Court of Session, unanimously held that a faulty door closer attached to the control room door of an oil rig platform was ‘work equipment’ for the purposes of reg 4 of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. When the claimant attempted to repair the door closer, he tested it by turning the screw that held the metal linkage arm between the door and the wall, but instead of reducing the tension, the screw came out and the metal linkage arm hit the claimant in the face, knocking out four front teeth. The regulation requires an employer to ‘ensure that work equipment is suitable’. It defines work equipment as ‘any machinery, appliance, apparatus, tool or installation for use at work (whether exclusively or not)’. It is not enough for the employer to take reasonable steps to do so. If the door closure was fitted for use at work (in the sense if it fulfilled a practical function of the business, such as helping people enter and leave the control room – then it was work equipment. Furthermore, the claimant in attempting to repair it had been ‘using’ it.