Wall - v - Bartlett Construction Group Ltd

Claimant Joyce Margaret Wall
Job title Secretary / Personal Assistant
Job description Display Screen Equipment work in the preparation of building tender submissions. Prolonged continuous use of DSE, no breaks from keyboard work. Audio and copy typing. VDU positioned to left so head turned at about 45 degrees.
Injury Bilateral Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and Cervical Spondylosis - a 'double-crush' effect
Defendant Bartlett Construction Group Ltd
Court Taunton County
Case No. YE801977
Date Nov 2001
Judge(s) Mr Recorder Roger Hetherington
For Claimant
All Claimants Joyce Margaret Wall
Solicitor Porter Dodson
Counsel Mr Bradley Martin
Non-Medical expert(s) Mr James Gillam, Engineering
Medical expert(s) Mr Pople, Neuro-surgery
For Defendant
Solicitor Hugh James Ford Simey
Counsel Mr Rohan Pershad
Non-Medical expert(s) Mr Stephen King, Health & Safety
Medical expert(s) Mr Andrei Calin, Rheumatology
Outcome
Judgment for: Claimant
Injury found: Yes
Work related: Yes
Breach of Statutory Duty: Yes
Defendant negligent: Yes
Damages
General: £14,000.00
Special: £995.00
Other: £25,067.00
TOTAL: £40,062.00
Observations
  Breach of Regulations 4, 6 & 7 of the Health & Safety (Display Screen Equipment) Regulations found.

No breach of Regulation 2(3) of the Health & Safety (Display Screen Equipment) Regulations with respect to screen sited at 45 degrees.
References
   
LAWTEL Case report

This case summary was published with kind permission of Lawtel (www.lawtel.com). Lawtel subscribers can access the full report at www.lawtel.com or for a free trial of the service click here.

The claimant, a 60-year-old woman, was awarded £40,062 for the repetitive strain injuries sustained during the course of her employment between 1994 and 1996. The claimant suffered from a combination of carpal tunnel syndrome and cervical spondylosis.
 
Claimant: Female: Between 53 and 55 years old at date of accident; 60 years old at date of award.
Employers’ Liability: Between 1994 and 1996, the claimant was employed by the defendant as a secretary/audio typist. The claimant worked for long hours spending up to 80 per cent of her time audio typing documents to tight deadlines without appropriate breaks.

The claimant sustained injury and brought an action against the defendant alleging that it was negligent in its health and safety duties and/or in breach of its statutory duty in failing to operate a safe system of working by: (i) providing an excessive and pressurised typing workload without appropriate breaks; and (ii) placing her computer monitor to the left so that she had to turn her head approximately 45 degrees.

Liability disputed. The defendant denied breach of duty and causation.

At trial, it was held that the defendant was in breach of its statutory duty in failing to organise and control the workload and ensure that breaks were being taken. With regard to the work station situation, the judge was not persuaded on the medical evidence that the defendant was negligent in placing the computer monitor on the left of the claimant’s desk.
 
Injuries: The claimant suffered from repetitive strain injuries during the course of her employment.
Effects: The claimant experienced symptoms of pain in her hands, wrists upper limbs, shoulder and neck, which gradually appeared from approximately June 1995.

The claimant visited her GP in September 1995 with upper limb symptoms. The claimant suffered from two clinical conditions, cervical spondylosis and bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. The combination of the two produced a "double crush effect" which handicapped the claimant to the point that she had to give up her typing work by September 1995.

In November 1996, the claimant underwent an operation to decompress the carpal tunnel syndrome which was of limited benefit.

Prognosis: The claimant suffered from ongoing symptoms in her upper limbs and was unable to continue with any typing work.
Court Award: £40,062 total damages.


Amend or add to this case| Add a new case report
Summary by Claimant | Summary by date of Judgment | Summary by Defendant | Home

Last updated: 20/05/2005