Defective protective clothing

Fytche v Wincanton Logistics plc (CA LSG 18 September)

The employee’s duties included collecting milk from farms during the night, for which purpose he was provided with a pair of steel toecapped safety boots to protect his feet against falling heavy objects. There was a tiny hole in one of his boots through which, in freezing conditions, water entered causing frostbite in one of his toes. He claimed damages for breach of regulation 7(1) of the Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992 which provide: ‘Every employer shall ensure that any personal protective equipment provided to his employees is maintained in an efficient state, in efficient working order and in good repair.’ In a majority decision (the High Court judge disagreeing with the two senior members of the Court), the claim was dismissed on the grounds that the boots were not designed to protect against the risk of water coming into contact with the claimant’s feet and, therefore, they complied with the regulations in that the steel toecap protection was maintained in an efficient state.