Scottish Court of Session Decisions

This was an action of damages for bodily injury by a labourer against his employers, in which the pursuer claimed damages alternatively at common law and under the Employers Liability Act 1880. From the proof led the following facts appeared—A number of workmen, one of whom was the pursuer, were engaged in the defenders' iron foundry in removing from the moulding-room to the courtyard outside a large iron casting weighing between two and three tons, and measuring about four feet in length and eighteen inches in diameter. The operation was conducted under the personal supervision of one of the partners of the defenders' firm. The floor over which the casting required to be conveyed to the yard was somewhat rough and uneven, but not more so than is common in moulding shops of the kind. The principal depression was one near the door, and on it iron plates had been laid to facilitate the passage of the bogie upon which the casting was being removed. This depression was about two feet broad, and at the deepest part was three or four inches in depth. The nature of the bogie and the manner in which the accident happened were thus described in the interlocutor of the Sheriff-Substitute, by which he found—“(2) That the casting was placed on a bogie which has four wheels, two being placed on an axle in the centre, and one being placed at each end, fastened by a bracket so placed that when the frame of the bogie is parallel with the ground, the two end wheels are somewhat removed from the ground, and the bogie is balanced on the two centre wheels. (3) That in the course of the operation the bogie stuck fast, and the hind wheel came in contact with the ground; that the bracket attaching the wheel to the body of the bogie broke, and the end of the bogie being thus left without support, dropped to the ground, and the casting slipped back and ultimately toppled over and fell upon the pursuer's leg, which was so severely crushed that it had to be amputated.” It was proved that the bogie which was used on the occasion in question had been frequently used in the conveyance of castings of not less weight than that which was upon it when it broke down, and was regarded as the best bogie in the defenders' works. It was also proved that some years before the accident the bracket at the end of it had broken down in a similar manner to that in which it broke down in the accident in question, and that it had been replaced by a new one of a somewhat heavier description.

The pursuer pleaded, that having been injured through the fault of the defenders in not providing a bogie of sufficient strength to bear the weight placed upon it, he was entitled to damages at common law. He also pleaded, that having while in the employment of the defenders been injured by a defect in their ways, works, machinery, or plant, he was entitled to damages under sec. 1, sub-sec. 1, of the Employers Liability Act 1880, which provides that “where personal injury is caused to a workman by reason of any defect in the condition of the ways, works, machinery, or plant connected with or used in the business of the employer, the workman… shall have the same right of compensation and remedies against the employer as if the workman had not been a workman, nor in the service of the employer, nor engaged in his work.”

The defence was a denial of fault in providing insufficient machinery or otherwise.