Ramp ruling ends threat of legal action
June 25th 2009 The House of Lords has ruled against a care worker who tried to sue her employer after she was injured using a ramp that had not been installed by the council she worked for.
It means organisations cannot be successfully sued in such circumstances under the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER).
It was held that employers should not be liable for equipment not supplied by them, particularly when it is not on their own premises.
Shoosmiths associate and insurance litigation and regulatory specialist Rubina Zaidi said: “The Law Lords made a crucial, point, saying employers who have no control over equipment that causes an injury should not be liable, even if they have inspected the equipment as part of a risk assessment.”
Shoosmiths acted for Northamptonshire County Council after the employee was injured as she pushed a wheelchair-bound patient down a ramp at their home. The employee slipped when the ramp ( not installed by the council) edge crumbled.
She sued the council, claiming inadequate work equipment under PUWER, and won, the judge ruling that the ramp was ‘work equipment’, which was inadequately maintained. The council went to the Court of Appeal, which held that the ramp was not work equipment for the purposes of PUWER, taking into account:
• The ramp had been installed by others,
• The council had neither the ability nor the right to maintain it
• It was used mostly by people not employed by the county council
• It was a permanent ramp
• The ramp was part of the patient's home
The employee appealed, taking her case to the House of Lords, resulting in the judgment. More articles from HSM News Desk: | 
