The High Court found that Clones Poultry Processors Limited breached its duty of care to an employee who was injured while loading a delivery van in a lane used by passing traffic. The employee was found 40% responsible for the accident, and judgment was entered against the company for €18,420.
The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Michael Peart on 10 December 2008, concerned an accident at the rear of the company’s premises at the Enterprise Centre in Clones, Co Monaghan, on 22 April 2003. The plaintiff, then almost 57, worked as dispatch manager and was loading poultry products into a van parked across an approximately 11-metre-wide roadway. The court found the roadway was a public place under the Road Traffic Act 1961 and accepted that members of the public regularly used it as a shortcut between roads.
The plaintiff said he moved from behind the van to watch a car pass, then turned back towards the van and found his right foot trapped beneath the wheel of another car. He had not heard or seen that second car before the collision. Its driver reversed to free his foot and left; the plaintiff did not record the registration number. The claim before the court was against his employer. Separate proceedings against the Motor Insurers’ Bureau of Ireland over an untraced driver had been commenced, and were to be determined after this case.
The court rejected the company’s argument that the plaintiff had stepped outside his employment by briefly watching the first car. It found that the employer should reasonably have anticipated the danger of staff loading vans where traffic regularly passed. The judge identified a high-visibility jacket and a designated safe loading area, preferably on the near side of the lane, as reasonable precautions. The absence of warning signs also contributed to the driver not being alerted to workers. The court found that the company had breached its common-law duty to provide a safe workplace, without needing to decide whether regulations had also been breached. It did not find that the absence of speed ramps or speed-limit signs caused this accident, noting there was no evidence the second car had been travelling other than very slowly.
The judge found the plaintiff significantly contributed to the accident because he turned back without checking whether a car was approaching, despite knowing traffic used the lane. His share of responsibility was set at 40%.
The plaintiff had fractured the base of the fifth metatarsal in his right foot. The injury was reported fully healed by 17 September 2003, and he returned to work on 6 October. The court assessed general damages for past pain and suffering at €28,000 and recorded agreed special damages of €2,700. After deducting €12,280 for contributory negligence, judgment was entered against the employer for €18,420.