Snow on the way back- UK Government advise to house holders on clearing obstructions
Clearing snow and ice from pavements yourself
The Uk government have responded to the issue of exposure to claims for householders who clear snow from their premises. The information appears on the Direct.gov site and is helpful in reassuring house holders.
An extract of the site is set out below.
Likewise the Irish government throught the attorney general’s office have publicised similar notices.
Clearly these publications address some silly stories which appeared in the media.
The guidance does not excuse careless behaviour e.g. trying to clear snow with boiling water which subsequently freeses and causes an accident or pipe leakages on public paths which cause accidents.
Likewise care should be taken in clearing snow & ice not to cause a tripping hazard!
Basically the law endorses & protects sensible behaviour.
Here’s hoping we don’t see a return to the chaos we experienced in December!!
Extract from UK Direct Gov site;
There’s no law stopping you from clearing snow and ice on the pavement outside your home or from public spaces. It’s unlikely you’ll be sued or held legally responsible for any injuries on the path if you have cleared it carefully. Follow the snow code when clearing snow and ice safely.
The snow code – tips on clearing snow and ice from pavements or public spaces
Prevent slips
Pay extra attention to clear snow and ice from steps and steep pathways – you might need to use more salt on these areas.
If you clear snow and ice yourself, be careful – don’t make the pathways more dangerous by causing them to refreeze. But don’t be put off clearing paths because you’re afraid someone will get injured.
Remember, people walking on snow and ice have responsibility to be careful themselves. Follow the advice below to make sure you clear the pathway safely and effectively.
Clear the snow or ice early in the day
It’s easier to move fresh, loose snow rather than hard snow that has packed together from people walking on it. So if possible, start removing the snow and ice in the morning. If you remove the top layer of snow in the morning, any sunshine during the day will help melt any ice beneath. You can then cover the path with salt before nightfall to stop it refreezing overnight.
Use salt or sand - not water
If you use water to melt the snow, it may refreeze and turn to black ice. Black ice increases the risk of injuries as it is invisible and very slippery. You can prevent black ice by spreading some salt on the area you have cleared. You can use ordinary table or dishwasher salt – a tablespoon for each square metre you clear should work. Don’t use the salt found in salting bins - this will be needed to keep the roads clear.
Be careful not to spread salt on plants or grass as it may cause them damage.
If you don’t have enough salt, you can also use sand or ash. These won’t stop the path icing over as well as salt, but will provide good grip under foot.
Take care where you move the snow
When you’re shovelling snow, take care where you put it so it doesn’t block people’s paths or drains. Make sure you make a path down the middle of the area to be cleared first, so you have a clear surface to walk on. Then shovel the snow from the centre of the path to the sides.
Offer to clear your neighbours’ paths
If your neighbour will have difficulty getting in and out of their home, offer to clear snow and ice around their property as well. Check that any elderly or disabled neighbours are alright in the cold weather. If you’re worried about them, contact your local council.
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1/Newsroom/DG_191868
Paul Tracey
Litigation Solicitor
05/01/2011
‘Good Samaritan’ award of €80,000 for personal injuries confirmed.
The decision of a recent case referred to as “The Good Samaritan” case, involving a member of the public who came to the assistance of a security guard in Dunnes Stores receiving compensation of € 80,000 was upheld by the Supreme Court.
The man who came to the assistance of a security officer received severe injuries, including facial injuries.
The case was originally heard in the High Court and damages were awarded on the basis that the security arrangements in place were substandard with only one security guard being responsible for the entire premises.
The case was heard back in June 2002 when the Plaintiff, Mr. O Neill was shopping in the shopping centre in Thurles. He came across a security guard who was apprehending an individual in the store. The Plaintiff,, saw the security guard struggling and helped the him try and restrain a youth while a second youth kicked and pulled at the both the men.
It appears that one of the assailants used a motor bike chain and struck Mr. O Neill in the face.
In revewing the case, a Supreme Court confirmed that the original High Court was entitled to conclude that the absence of anyone to assist the Security Guard on the day in question was unreasonable.
The security guard had to seek assistance from a member of the public and the need for an extra security guard was caused by the negligence of the department store.
The court indicated that the situation was entirely foreseeable.
The comments are interesting in the context that it centres not so much on the “Good Samaritan” took compensation but rather focuses on the adequacy of the security system in place which lead to the injuries sustained by the Plaintiff.
The case will remind proprietors of shops and supermarkets of the need to carry out an appropriate risk assessment, in particular to how their business is run and secured and it would appear that, an adequate risk assessment, if not carried out and funded, could lead to a claim for compensation.
Paul W Tracey Solicitor
22nd November 2010
Farm Accidents statistics show increase in fatal accidents.
A farmer recently died in tragic circumstances when he fell into a slurry tank.
The accident, involving a 66 year old man near Mullingar.
Efforts to resuscitate the man were, unsuccessful. The Heath & Safety Authority and the Gardai have both investigated this accident.
Unfortunately, farm accidents have been on the increase in recent years and this tragedy emphasises the need for renewed attention to safety in the workplace, in particular, on the farm.
€76k awarded to bus driver after suspension failure causes serious injury
A DUBLIN Bus driver injured when the pneumatic suspension on his vehicle failed as he drove over a speed ramp has been awarded nearly €76,000 in High Court damages.
The driver was represented by Dublin personal injury law firm Paul W Tracey Solicitors
The firm had sued the employer and a local authority on behalf of the injured driver (Dublin Bus & South Dublin Co Co) over the incident on the Tallaght to Bohernabreena Road on September 27, 2005, when the driver suffered injuries to his neck and lower back.
The driver had driven the 201 bus over three ramps on the road when, as he went over a fourth ramp, the suspension malfunctioned and caused a loss of “cushion effect” to the bus.
Mr. Justice Éamon de Valera sitting in the High Court awarded €75,911 damages against Dublin Bus. The judge said that the driver was entitled to succeed in his claim against the bus company but not against the council which had, he said, built the ramps in accordance with best practice.
The judgment went on to say that Dublin Bus had a statutory duty to ensure necessary measures are taken so that the equipment used is suitable, or properly adapted, for its purpose so that it can be used by employees without risk to their safety and health.
Where there is a risk or rupture or disintegration of equipment likely to pose a danger to health and safety, then appropriate protection measures shall be taken, the judge added.
Paul W Tracey Solicitors June 2010
Injuries Board Authorisations- what do I do next?
Filed under: Accidents, Drink Driving, Injury Law, Road Accidents
In recent months we at Paul W Tracey Solicitors have found that we are receiving an increasing amount of queries from clients who have received authorisations from the injuries board for matters relating to accidents at work, road traffic accidents and other personal injury cases and are unsure as to what the next step in the process is.
What does the Authorisation mean?
If you have processed an injuries board application, the injuries board may issue an authorisation in 3 sets of circumstances;
1) The Respondent has declined to have the claim assessed; in these circumstances the respondent named on the injuries board authorisation has declined to permit to allow the injuries board assess your case.
2) The injuries board have reviewed your application and have deemed that due to the nature of your injuries the injuries board will not be able to assess your case within the time frame permitted under law.
3) An assessment may have been made by the injuries board but either you or the Respondent has declined the assessment, this could arise in circumstances where you are of the view that the amount of the assessment is in inadequate or the respondent is of the view that the amount of the assessment is excessive.
What Should I do?
Instructing a solicitor with expertise in this area like ourselves is the first step to secure your position
We can offer advice to you in regard to issuing Court Proceedings.
We always liaise with Senior and junior counsel when assessing such matters and we have over 20 successful years in specialising in personal injury litigation much to our very satisfied client base.
Please be aware that certain time frames exist under Irish law in order to permit you to commence court proceedings, it is therefore important that you contact our office in order to get initial advice in regard to these timeframes in order to avoid your case becoming statute barred under law.
What is the Cost?
Our initial advises are on a no obligation basis.
Contact us at law@traceysolicitors.ie or by phoning 00 1 8475656
Warning issued to prevent accidents in Freezing Weather conditions
The Health & Safety Authority has issued recommendations to employers & workers in light of the recent cold snap.
The advise is timely and is of benefit to employers and employees alike in reducing accidents in the workplace.
‘Freezing temperatures renders construction work even more hazardous than normal. When the body is unable to warm itself, cold related stress may result. Four factors contribute to cold stress: cold air temperatures, high velocity air movement, dampness of the air and contact with cold water or surfaces. A cold environment forces the body to work harder to maintain its temperature. Cold air, water, and snow all draw heat from the body. Wind chill is the combination of air temperature and wind speed.
Risk Assessments need to be reviewed as extreme low temperatures greatly change and usually increase the risks associated with most external construction work. The following areas of work are particularly adversely affected by extreme cold conditions:
- Work at Height – work at height platforms, roofwork, etc. will all become more hazardous if ice or snow are on them. The risks of falls from heights are increased as the risk of slips, etc. is greatly increased. This type of work should only be undertaken if absolutely necessary and sufficient additional controls are put in place. For example – full check of all platforms and fall/edge protection, de-icing of work platforms, etc.
- Slips, Trips & Falls –the risk of these are greatly increased due to icy conditions. Walkways should be cleared of ice and snow with regular gritting/ salting. Ensure hoses, etc. aren’t left running in areas as the excess water will freeze and cause a further slip hazard.
- Construction plant operation –
- caution must be exercised when accessing or egressing from construction plant as access steps and hand hold surfaces may be covered in ice.
- wheel grip could be compromised and control of vehicles could be lost
- Welfare Facilities – arrangements must be in place to provide adequate welfare facilities, especially an area where workers can go to warm up, change/dry clothes and get hot beverages.
The following should be noted when risk assessing and planning for construction work in extreme cold temperatures.
Cold Temperature Exposures, Injuries, and Controls on the Jobsite
1. Wearing the proper clothes / PPE may be the most significant precaution to reducing cold stress. Wearing appropriate clothes for cold weather usually involves using three or more layers of clothing. Also use layering to protect the head, hands and feet.
2. Drink plenty of fluids, preferably warm, sweet beverages. Thirst is suppressed in a cold environment and dehydration may occur when fluid intake is reduced.
3. Increase caloric intake when working in cold environments. Workers in cold environments who wear heavy, protective clothing expend more heat and so require 10-15 percent more calories.
4. If required, a work warm-up schedule should be used to provide periodic times for warm-up breaks. Additional breaks should be provided as the wind velocity increases and/or the temperature drops.
5. Avoid the cold if you are becoming exhausted or immobilised. These conditions can accelerate the effects of cold weather.
6. Engineering controls can be effective such as using heaters in areas, where practical, shielding work areas from winds and drafts, using insulating material on equipment handles, especially metal handles, etc.
7. Select the warmest hours of the day, where possible, when braving the cold. Minimise activities that reduce circulation.
8. Educate employees on symptoms of cold-related stresses: heavy shivering, uncomfortable coldness, severe fatigue, drowsiness and/or euphoria.
9. Use the buddy system.Work in pairs when working in extreme weather conditions so partners can monitor one another and obtain help quickly in an emergency.’
It is clear that extra vigilance is required when the weather such as recently experienced comes to bother us!
Paul Tracey
20/01/2010
Death of Polish brings fine of €350,000
Death of Polish Worker brings fine of €350,000.
In what seems to be a too familiar reoccurrence a tragic accident has taken the life of a polish worker working in Ireland
The accident which occurred in April 2006 was the matter for a court hearing this month in which the Health & Safety Authority brought a prosecution against a Roscommon based building company.
The accident which led to the tragedy involved a fall from a teleporter.
Roscommon Circuit court found that there was a failure to put in place necessary safety measures and as a result the death had occurred.
Fines of €350,000 were imposed on the company & its director.
Whilst cases of this nature primarily concerns the enforcement of safety practice breaches of Health and Safety legislation can also lead to civil action for compensation for the loss of life and financial dependency.
A representative of the Health and Safety Authority commented ‘that the case should be a deterrent to other directors and senior managers who are not talking the legal and moral duties seriously.’
The significant numbers of Polish workers who have worked and continue to work in the construction industry in Ireland mean that this is not the only report of tragic loss of life as a result of carelessness and neglect by an employer.
Paul W Tracey
11/12/2009
Compensation for injuries in the workplace. Statistics form 2008
Some interesting data has been released by the Injuries Board in a publication entitled ’ A review of employer Liability Awards 2008 ‘which gives an insight into the types of accidents that occur in Ireland.
Apart from data on the awards which injured persons were made the report sets out anumber of examples of cases dealt with.
Given that the bulk of the cases are presented by solicitors it shows that the scheme seems to be operating in a reasonably successful manner.
The key to having a satisfactory result appears to lie in the presentation of the case in the best possible fashion.
Clearly cases where the extent of injuries ,out of pocket expenses and future losses are not properly addressed claimants can loose out.
On that basis it appears that solicitors continue to have a significant role to play in securing the best results for their clients.
Solicitors’ experience on court awards and the fact that insurers very often do not respond with the threat of court proceedings help secure better awards for clients.
The sample cases make interesting reading and we have selected some for you to read, comments as always welcome!
Paul Tracey
Litigation solicitor
Paul W Tracey
Solicitors
01-8745656
e mail law@traceysolicitors.ie
Sample Cases
While working as a bar tender in her local hotel, Siobhán suffered lacerations to her left wrist due to broken glass that had not been cleared. This transpired to be quite a serious injury as the nerves and tendons in Siobhan’s wrist had been damaged. This damage was subsequently repaired with surgery. She was out of work for approximately four weeks and has regular physiotherapy sessions to restore the strength, dexterity and sensation in her fingers. An award of just over €37,000 in compensation was made.
Edward, an engineer, fell from a height of 10ft when the scaffolding he was working on collapsed underneath him. He suffered a broken wrist and lacerations to his ear and eyelid when scaffold poles fell on him. His injury resulted in some reduction in his hand movement and strength, some mild hearing loss and he still has scarring on his ear. He was awarded just under €39,000 in compensation.
Paddy
This gentleman had to have his left index finger amputated when it was severed due to a defective power saw he was working with on a construction site. The tool was not fitted with a safety guard. As a result of his injury, Paddy will have lifelong disability and loss of grip in his left hand. He avoids working with power tools on-site and often finds some social situations awkward. He was awarded just over €59,500; part of this award was for loss of earnings.
Nuala
Nuala, a deli worker, was injured due to defective equipment when she was dismantling an advertising board in the restaurant where she worked. She suffered a crush injury with lacerations to her left index finger which required plastic surgery. In cold weather particularly, she still suffers from numbness and decreased function in the tip of her finger and finds sewing, previously a hobby of hers, most uncomfortable. Nuala’s claim was processed and she was awarded just over €23,000.
William
He sustained a chemical burn to his lower legs whilst working in a pharmaceutical plant. He had not been provided with the correct protective uniform. These burns required corrective plastic surgery and some scarring still remains. William must now be extra vigilant regarding day to day sun exposure. William’s claim was processed and he was awarded over €28,000 in compensation.
Claire, a factory worker, was operating a rotation machine when it suddenly jammed. A broken part of the machine was then released and struck her in the face causing injury and lacerations to her face and mouth and also causing damage to her teeth. This injury required extensive reconstructive work and will require additional treatment in the future. She was awarded €53,000 in General and Special Damages, this allows for costs incurred for future dental work.
As a member of the restaurant service staff, Cormac a student, slipped on a wet floor that had just been mopped but there was no warning sign displayed. The tray of crockery that he was carrying broke and he suffered deep lacerations to his left hand. This injury required three separate surgical operations to fully repair the damaged tendons and Cormac was unable to work for several months. He still has reduced movement in his hand but regularly attends for physiotherapy to aid this. His claim was processed and he was awarded just over €40,000 in compensation.
Joe sustained a twisting, sprain injury when he slipped and fell while descending a defective staircase in the office. Due to the severity of his ligament injury and the nature of his job. Joe was unable to work for approximately four months as he was on crutches. His claim was processed he was awarded just over €20,000 in Damages, this includes a figure for Loss of earnings
While working as a warehouse operative, Julia was required to engage in repetitive bending and lifting of heavy boxes. Her employer had not enlisted her on a Safety Manual Handling course and subsequently she suffered acute lower back pain. Julia was unable to work and could not socialise with friends for several weeks. She was awarded just over €30,000.
Tim
Tim, a driver was temporarily blinded when a defective electrical heater in the depot exploded, releasing debris which had to be removed from his eyes. Tim now has slight blurring of vision in his left eye and suffers regular discomfort to his eyes. Tim received just under €11,000 in compensation.
