Tesco Ireland Limited was chiefly responsible for a warehouse worker’s ankle injury after he collided with a stationary order-picking truck left in his path, the High Court has found. The worker was held 20% responsible because he should have looked forward more while driving.
The judgment by Ms Justice Bronagh O’Hanlon concerns an accident at Tesco’s distribution premises in Donabate, Co Dublin, on 22 December 2014. The plaintiff, an employee and warehouse operator, was helping to remove empty cages from a trailer so it could be loaded. The court accepted that the work was being done under significant pressure and that the supervisor had brought in extra staff for a task normally done by one person.
The plaintiff said he was watching a cage that had been slipping from his truck after being told to “watch it”. He collided with another, stationary low-level order-picking truck. Its raised forks or tines crushed his right ankle. The other vehicle’s driver, Marko Savic, disputed that he had parked it improperly. The plaintiff’s engineer said it should have been parked away from the route with its forks lowered. The defendant’s engineer argued that the plaintiff should have been watching where he was going and disputed that tying the cages to the truck would have prevented the collision.
The court accepted the plaintiff’s account of the pressure and instructions, and preferred the plaintiff’s engineer on most points. It found that the stationary truck had been left directly in the plaintiff’s path, with its tines raised, and that this caused the accident. The court held Tesco liable for the other driver’s actions and found that the company had failed to ensure a safe system of work. It nevertheless found the plaintiff 20% liable because he should have been looking forward to a greater degree.
On damages, the court noted evidence of a right ankle soft-tissue injury, continuing stiffness and occasional soreness, with reduced movement and limits on activities including running and skateboarding. Medical evidence did not predict significant long-term problems. The judgment says the plaintiff was out of work for six months, while an earlier passage records a six-week absence.
The court awarded €58,000 for pain and suffering to date, €20,000 for future pain and suffering, and €5,806 in agreed special damages, including earnings loss and medical costs. From the €83,606 total, it deducted 20% for contributory negligence, leaving an award of €66,884.80.