The High Court has dismissed a fire officer’s action against South Tipperary County Council over an ankle injury he suffered while leaving a fire tender during an oil spill clean-up in Cashel.
In a judgment delivered on 25 October 2016, Mr Justice Barr found the accident was not caused by negligence or breach of duty by the council. He said the plaintiff may not have taken sufficient care about where he placed his foot, given that oil had made the soles of his boots more prone to slipping.
The accident happened on 4 January 2012 at Cooper’s Lot, Clonmel Road, Cashel, where a tanker had leaked oil across the road. The plaintiff, a Station Officer at Cashel Fire Station and the most senior firefighter at the scene, was the designated Incident Commander. He had climbed into the tender to radio a progress report and fell as he got out, injuring his right ankle.
The plaintiff said oil on his boots contributed to the slip and that the tender’s ribbed cab-floor nosing allowed his foot to slide off. He alleged the council should have provided a way to clean boots, used nosing with grip in more directions, applied a special anti-slip coating, and given specific warnings and training about oil contamination. He also alleged breaches of sections 8, 9, 10 and 19 of the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005.
The council argued that the plaintiff was an experienced firefighter who knew oil could make boots slippery and knew the safe method for using the tender: facing the cab, using both handrails and keeping three points of contact. The judge found he knew the procedure and had trained new recruits in it.
The court accepted evidence that the boot manufacturer had said there was no product on the market to remove oil from leather boots. It also accepted that the plaintiff had been told not to apply the Oil Free road-cleaning product to boots because it could damage them. The judge found the tender was in good condition, met industry standards and had adequate nosing when approached using the correct technique.
The judge concluded that a specific risk assessment about oil on boots was not necessary in the circumstances because the risk was obvious and known to the plaintiff. He found the plaintiff had received adequate training and that the Health and Safety Authority’s guidance on falls from vehicles did not create an additional legal duty. The action was dismissed.