| Wilsons and Clyde Coal Ltd v English | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | House of Lords |
| Decided | 19 July 1937 |
| Citation(s) | [1937] UKHL 2, [1938] AC 57, [1937] UKHL 2, [1937] 3 All ER 628 |
| Court membership | |
| Judge(s) sitting | Lord Atkin, Lord Thankerton, Lord Macmillan, Lord Wright and Lord Maugham |
| Keywords | |
| Health and safety, implied terms | |
Wilsons and Clyde Coal Ltd v English [1937] UKHL 2 is a UK labour law case concerning the employer's duty to provide a safe system of work for all its employees.
Mr English was employed at Wilsons & Clyde Coal Co Ltd's colliery at Glencraig from 27 March 1933. He was repairing an airway leading off the Mine Jigger Brae, a main haulage road. Between 1:30pm and 2pm he was going to the pit bottom and the haulage plant was put in motion. He tried to escape through one of the manholes, but was caught by a rake of hutches and crushed between it and the side of the road. His family claimed damages. The company claimed that Mr English's own negligence contributed to his death, because he should have told the person in charge of the machinery, or taken an alternative route
House of Lords held unanimously that an employer has a non delegable duty to create a safe system of work. Even if an employer gives that duty to another person, they still remain accountable for workplace safety.
Lord Atkin said he concurred with the other Lordships, and particularly with opinions given by the ‘Lord President in this case, and by the Lord Justice-Clerk in Bain v Fife Coal Co on the English case of Fanton v Denville .
Lord Thankerton gave a longer judgment saying, [1] ‘when a workman contracts to do work, he is not to be held as having agreed to hold the master immune from the latter’s liability for want of due care in the provision of a reasonably safe system of working.’
Lord Macmillan gave a short judgment concurring with Lord Thankerton, the Lord President in the present case and by Lord Justice-Clerk Aitchison.
Lord Wright gave a longer judgment.
Lord Maugham delivered a short concurring judgment.
Donoghue v Stevenson[1932] UKHL 100 was a landmark court decision in Scots delict law and English tort law by the House of Lords. It laid the foundation of the modern law of negligence in Common law jurisdictions worldwide, as well as in Scotland, establishing general principles of the duty of care.
English tort law concerns the compensation for harm to people's rights to health and safety, a clean environment, property, their economic interests, or their reputations. A "tort" is a wrong in civil, rather than criminal law, that usually requires a payment of money to make up for damage that is caused. Alongside contracts and unjust enrichment, tort law is usually seen as forming one of the three main pillars of the law of obligations.
Yewens v Noakes (1881) 6 QBD 530, was an English tax law case which addressed the question of the division between master and servant.
Candler v Crane, Christmas & Co [1951] 2 KB 164 is an English tort law case on negligent misstatement.
Wilson v Racher [1974] ICR 428 is a UK labour law case concerning constructive dismissal. It serves as an example of an employer being found to have wrongfully dismissed an employee, because of the employer's own bad behaviour. Edmund-Davies LJ also made an important statement about the modern employment relationship,
What would today be regarded as almost an attitude of Czar-serf, which is to be found in some of the older cases where a dismissed employee failed to recover damages, would, I venture to think, be decided differently today. We have by now come to realise that a contract of service imposes upon the parties a duty of mutual respect.
Lister v Romford Ice and Cold Storage Co Ltd[1956] UKHL 6 is an important English tort law, contract law and labour law, which concerns vicarious liability and an ostensible duty of an employee to compensate the employer for torts he commits in the course of employment.
Guinness plc v Saunders [1989] UKHL 2 is a UK company law case, regarding the power of the company to pay directors. It required that whatever rules exist for payment in the company's articles, they must be strictly observed.
Johnstone v Bloomsbury Health Authority [1992] QB 333 is an English contract law case, concerning implied terms and unfair terms under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.
Nokes v Doncaster Amalgamated Collieries Ltd [1940] AC 1014 is a UK labour law case about the common law before the Transfers of Undertakings Directive 2001 and the Transfer of Undertakings Regulations 2006. The case decided that an employee had to consent before a burden was placed on him by a change in employer.
An employment contract in English law is a specific kind of contract whereby one person performs work under the direction of another. The two main features of a contract is that work is exchanged for a wage, and that one party stands in a relationship of relative dependence, or inequality of bargaining power. On this basis, statute, and to some extent the common law, requires that compulsory rights are enforceable against the employer.
Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher [2011] UKSC 41 is a landmark UK labour law and English contract law case decided by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, concerning the scope of statutory protection of rights for working individuals. It confirmed the view, also taken by the Court of Appeal, that the relative bargaining power of the parties must be taken into account when deciding whether a person counts as an employee, to get employment rights. As Lord Clarke said,
the relative bargaining power of the parties must be taken into account in deciding whether the terms of any written agreement in truth represent what was agreed and the true agreement will often have to be gleaned from all the circumstances of the case, of which the written agreement is only a part. This may be described as a purposive approach to the problem.
Chandler v Cape plc [2012] EWCA Civ 525 is a decision of the Court of Appeal which addresses the availability of damages for a tort victim from a parent company, in circumstances where the victim suffered industrial injury during employment by a subsidiary company.
Clay Cross Ltd v Fletcher [1978] 1 WLR 1429 is a UK labour law case concerning sex discrimination, unequal pay, and the limits of justifications for it. It would now fall under the Equality Act 2010 sections 64 to 80.
Sagar v Ridehalgh & Sons Ltd [1931] 1 Ch 310 is a UK labour law case concerning the contract of employment. It concerns the implication of terms, regarding deductions from wages, through the custom of an industry.
Dubai Aluminium Co Ltd v Salaam [2002] UKHL 48 is an English vicarious liability case, concerning also breach of trust and dishonest assistance.
Kondis v State Transport Authority, was an Australian court case decided in the High Court of Australia on 16 October 1984. It concerned the liability of an employer for the injury of an employee, and specifically whether the duty of care to provide a safe system of work could be delegated. It had been challenged on the basis that the person whose negligence had directly caused the injury was not actually an employee, but an independent contractor, and the duty of care to provide a safe system of work had been delegated to them at the time of the injury. However, it was found that the duty of care could not be delegated in certain cases, and the employer was found liable.
Barber v Somerset CC [2004] UKHL 13 is a UK labour law case, concerning wrongful dismissal.
Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and Botham v Ministry of Defence[2011] UKSC 58 is a UK labour law case, concerning wrongful dismissal.
Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11 is a Scottish delict, medical negligence and English tort law case on doctors and pharmacists that outlines the rule on the disclosure of risks to satisfy the criteria of an informed consent. The Supreme Court departed and overruled the earlier House of Lords case in Sidaway v Board of Governors of the Bethlem Royal Hospital, in reconsidering the duty of care of a doctor towards a patient on medical treatment. The case changed the Bolam test to a greater test in medical negligence by introducing the general duty to attempt the disclosure of risks.
Royal Mencap Society v Tomlinson-Blake [2021] UKSC 8 is a UK labour law case, concerning the right to be paid, when an employer constrains their worker's freedom.