Climate Greenspace Health and Safety Legal Update: December 2013


Welcome to the Climate Greenspace Health and Safety Legal Update: December 2013 monthly email as part of your subscription to Waterman's Greenspace platform. The monthly updates show any:

  • new legal entries added to your register;
  • amendments to legal entries in your register; and
  • legal entries removed from your legal register.

It also contains links to new publications from Government and regulatory bodies and examples of relevant offences, highlighting how legislation is implemented and enforced in practice.
As well as receiving this update by email you will also find it saved on your Greenspace site under the Legal Register > Monthly Updates tab at the top of your Greenspace page.


 
 
 
 
December 2013
 
 
Congratulations. There are no changes to the legislation or other requirements in your legal register.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Recent Publications
 
 

HSE

In December 2013 the HSE issued four revised Approved Code of Practice and Guidance (ACoP) documents in support of its objective to clarify and simplify legal guidance in line with the findings of the Löfstedt report.

L5: Control of substances hazardous to health (Approved Code of Practice and Guidance)

This ACoP has been revised. This document provides guidance on the management of hazardous substances at work and how to meet obligations under the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002, as amended.

The revised document is reduced in length and reflects changes to the hazardous substances regime in light of the implementation of the REACH and the CLP Regulations.

L143: Managing and working with asbestos: Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 (Approved Code of Practice and Guidance)

This ACoP consolidates and replaces two ACoPs (L127: the management of asbestos in domestic premises and L143: work with materials containing asbestos). The ACoP updates terminology and references in line with changes to legislation since the previous ACoPs were last published.

L138: Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 (Approved Code of Practice and Guidance)

This ACoP consolidates and replaces four ACoPs (L134, L135, L136 and L137) on the Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002, as amended. These Regulations and the ACoP apply to all businesses storing, manufacturing, processing or using dangerous substances.

No further duties have been introduced by the revised ACoP.

L118: Health and safety at quarries. The Quarries Regulations 1999 (Approved Code of Practice)

This ACoP has been revised in order to clarify the information given and to reflect changes to the legislation since the first edition.

Shale gas and hydraulic fracturing (Fracking (Q&A)

This document provides guidance on the HSE’s in the regulation of shale gas exploration and fracking activities.

Safe use of skip loaders: Advice for workers

This short document provides advice to workers moving skips and containers.
 

Scottish Government

Civil Law of Damages: Issues in Personal Injury - Scottish Government Response to Consultation

A consultation on the civil law of damages in relation to personal injuries ran from 15 December 2012 to 15 March 2013.  This consultation asked a series of questions in relation to proposals to reform the law of damages for personal injury.

The action intended to taken will be delivered through the Damages Bill which was announced by the First Minister as one of the legislative priorities of the Scottish Government’s Programme for 2013-2014 on September 3, 2013.

The summary of action to be taken is as follows:

  • amend the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 (the 1973 Act) to increase the limitation period for raising an action for damages for personal injury from 3 years to 5 years;
  • update the reference in the 1973 Act to 'unsoundness of mind' in relation to the circumstances in which the limitation period does not run;
  • provide a list of factors to assist the courts with the exercise of their existing discretion under the 1973 Act to allow an action to proceed when raised after the expiry of the limitation period;
  • replace the current assessment under the 1973 Act of 'reasonably practicable' in relation to the date of knowledge test for determining the start of the limitation period, with a more subjective awareness assessment;
  • clarify that it should not be possible for a bereaved relative to secure damages for psychiatric injury under the Damages (Scotland) Act 2011; and
  • provide courts with the power to impose periodic payments in relation to awards of damages for personal injury.

These measures in combination are intended to address some of the practical difficulties in pursuing claims for complex personal injuries, including industrial diseases which may require a higher degree of investigatory work.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Offences
 
 

Shropshire businessman fined for falsifying safety document

A Shropshire businessman, who supplies workplace vehicles and lifting equipment, has been fined on 10 December 2013 for falsifying a safety document for a forklift truck.

Wolverhampton Magistrates’ Court was told that Mr Stuart Jeavons, 57, of Bridge Road, Broseley, intentionally made a false entry on a Report of Thorough Examination for the truck, a statutory document required by law to show that lifting equipment is in a good state of repair.

A Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigation found Mr Jeavons had put the name of a genuine forklift truck supplier at the top of the report and forged a genuine examiner’s signature at the bottom.

Mr Jeavons was fined £2,400 and ordered to pay costs of £989 after pleading guilty to a breach of Section 33(1)(l) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 which states: “It is an offence for a person to intentionally to make a false entry in any register, book, notice or other document required by or under any of the relevant statutory provisions to be kept, served or given or, with intent to deceive, to make use of any such entry which he knows to be false.”

 

West Yorkshire firm neglected safety for staff

A Leeds-based company, Onesubsea UK Ltd, was prosecuted on 16 December 2013 after it ignored health and safety regulations over several years, leaving several employees with disabling vibration-related disease.

Onesubsea UK Ltd produces valve assemblies and flow line parts and supplies the worldwide oil and gas industries.  The company failed to act on known advice and guidance to protect workers from the risks of developing the debilitating hand arm vibration syndrome (HAVS). Leeds Crown Court was told that between 1999 and 2010, the company, then known as Cameron Ltd, exposed employees to risks to their health and safety from the repeated use of hand-held power tools. At the time, approximately 450 of the 1,000 Leeds workers were employed on the shop floor and a significant number regularly used air guns, grinders, sanders, drills and torque wrenches.

After health surveillance re-commenced at its factory in Queen Street, Stourton, 24 workers were identified as having symptoms of vibration-related disease during the two-year period to March 2012. Some had developed them in the late 1990s but had been given little or no health surveillance and no adequate remedial steps were taken to reduce the risks to staff.

As a result, a number of employees had developed long-term damage to their circulation and nervous systems after contracting HAVS after prolonged use of powered pneumatic hand tools. HSE’s investigation was prompted by reports it received under the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995.

The HSE identified multiple failings by Onesubsea UK Ltd over a protracted period, these included the following:

  • Failure to properly assess the risks from use of the powered hand tools, or take into account multi-tool use by employees;
  • Did not take steps to control the risks which were known, and failed to produce a coherent plan to introduce controls within a timescale;
  • Failed to reduce vibration exposure by modifying existing processes, or replacing tools with updated models;
  • Failed to provide an on-going health surveillance programme designed to monitor and address risks to staff;
  • Did not provide employees with adequate training and information on the safe use of tools, nor carry out maintenance of equipment properly

Onesubsea UK Ltd, registered at New Bridge Street, Westminster, London, was fined £52,500 and ordered to pay £92,000 in costs after pleading guilty to a breach of Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 whereby “It shall be the duty of every employer to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees.”.

 

Business owner sentenced for customer death failings

Mr Mark Walker, the owner of a Berkshire car maintenance business, Complete Car Care on Welley Road, Wraysbury was sentenced for safety failings on 18 December 2013 after reversing into and killing a customer in his van.

Mr Frederick Gleeson, 79, from Staines, Surrey, had taken his car to the domestic business to have an oil leak checked and sustained fatal head injuries after he was struck by a van by Mr Walker on 12 March 2012.

Reading Crown Court heard during the trial that Mr Gleeson was in the driveway of the premises as Mark Walker started to reverse his van along the drive to leave the garage. Mr Gleeson was unable to react in time as the van came towards him and was knocked over, banging his head on the drive. He was rushed to Wrexham Park Hospital but died later the same day from his injuries.

A subsequent investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) identified that Mark Walker had no system in place for safely managing the movement of vehicles, particularly reversing vehicles, in his yard.

Mr Walker was fined £7,500 and ordered to undertake 250 hours of community work after being found guilty of breaching Section 2(1) and 3(2) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974Section 3(2) of the Act requires that every self-employed person to conduct his undertaking in such a way as to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that he and other persons (not being his employees) who may be affected thereby are not thereby exposed to risks to their health or safety. Mr Walker was also liable for £75,000 in prosecution costs.

 
 
 
 
 
 
Kenny Wintle
e: kenny.wintle@watermangroup.com

Waterman Infrastructure & Environment Ltd
2nd Floor | Cubo | 38 Carver Street | Sheffield | S1 4FS | t: 0114 2298900
Pickfords Wharf | Clink St | London | SE1 9DG, t: 0207 928 7888

Waterman Greenspace takes the burden out of your Management Systems and the hard work from Compliance.

Waterman has taken all reasonable precautions to ensure that information contained in this bulletin is accurate, but stresses that the content is not intended to be comprehensive. Waterman recommends that no action be taken on matters covered in this bulletin without taking full professional advice. Waterman holds the copyright for the Legal Update which is sent to you on the basis that it should not be used or reproduced in any material or other medium produced by you or passed to any third parties without the prior consent of Waterman.
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
© 2025 Waterman Group plc
 
 
 


The contents of this e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. Any views stated herein do not necessarily represent the view of the company and are those of the individual sender, except where it specifically states them to be the views of the Company.
No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mis-transmission. If you have received this e-mail in error please delete it and all copies and e-mail a notification to the sender. Any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may constitute a breach of confidence.


All reasonable precautions have been taken to see that no viruses are present in this e-mail. Waterman Group cannot accept liability for loss, disruption or damage however caused, arising from the use of this e-mail or attachments and recommend that you subject these to virus checking procedures prior to use.
E-mail messages may be monitored and by replying to this message the recipient gives their consent to such monitoring.