The High Court awarded €95,000 to a stud farm worker who was kicked in the face by a yearling, finding that his employer failed to clearly communicate and implement a planned safety procedure involving sedation before washing the horses.
Mr Justice Mary Rose Gearty’s judgment, delivered on 1 June 2022, found Abbey Equine Limited, trading as Abbeyleix Stud Farm, in breach of its duties under the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005. The court assessed the worker’s contribution to the incident at 5% and measured the award accordingly.
The incident happened on 26 September 2014, as staff prepared six yearlings for sale under time pressure. The worker, a former jockey who had trained the young stallion involved for about ten weeks, was washing one of its legs while another groom held the horse. The yearling reared, knocked the groom down and kicked the worker in the face before running from the wash bay.
The farm manager had arranged for a vet to attend and intended that the horses be sedated before washing. The worker and the groom who assisted him said they had not received clear instructions to change the usual order of work, which involved exercising and washing the horses before shoeing. The manager said he had told the worker about the plan. The judge found it more likely than not that no clear instruction had been given to the worker or the relevant witnesses. The manager had left to work in the fields and was not present to oversee the preparation.
The court accepted that sedation before washing would have reduced the risk of a horse kicking out during grooming. It found the farm had decided the precaution was needed to protect staff, but had failed to communicate and implement it. The judge concluded that this failure was the probable cause of the accident. The court also considered the changed handler, time pressure and the unfamiliar atmosphere of preparing several horses together. It found no evidence that the assisting groom had been negligent and rejected a claim that the employer was vicariously liable for his conduct.
The employer admitted failures to provide training and to review safety statements, but the judge found those failures were not causally linked to this injury. The court also found that the worker’s experience meant he did not need a safety statement to tell him where to stand. It nevertheless found a breach concerning the failure to implement the planned sedation procedure.
The worker was found to have contributed minimally by not asking for the more familiar handler to assist. The judge assessed that contribution at 5%, then measured the award at €95,000.