Summary
The Claimant suffered a Closed Head Injury when his head was trapped between a heavy moving stillage/trolley and a concrete wall. The Insured subsequently received a claim as a result of being Principal Contractor of the material site, such being framed with reference the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015.
Factual Findings
The Claimant, an employee of a Sub-Contractor, was pushing a stillage along with three Colleagues. As they were pushing the trolley, the Claimant’s Colleagues failed to avoid scaffold poles which had been left on the ground across the walkway. The front wheel of the stillage struck a scaffold pole, causing the trolley to slew before trapping the Claimant’s head.
Key to the case was determining who deposited the scaffold poles in situ, and how long the hazard had been in place. Unfortunately, however, we could obtain no direct evidence in this regard despite extensive enquiries.
We were, however, able to obtain statements from the Insured’s Supervisor, and crucially the Claimant’s Supervisor, confirming that they had completed a walkthrough inspection of the area that morning. They both confirmed that the scaffold poles were not present during the course of their inspection, and that they must have been placed by an unidentified third party, during a relatively short period between the inspection and accident.
Liability was denied on the basis that the Insured were not in breach of their duty of care, having implemented a reasonable system of inspection / maintenance. There was nothing the Insured could have done to have prevented the scaffold poles being left in situ following their inspection, nor was there enough time for them to have reasonably been expected to identify and remove them before the accident occurred.
Outcome
Our denial of liability was maintained, with such being predicated on the strength of the witness statements we obtained at an early stage in our investigation.
It was fortunate that we did so, as both Witnesses were sacked (for unrelated reasons) a short period after their signed statements were obtained. Had we delayed in obtaining their signed statements, then it is likely that they would not have cooperated with our later attempts, and their evidence subsequently lost. Evidence which was key to a denial being maintained.
Speak with us for more information or to arrange a claims defensibility survey for your business.