Login Join Us
A spotlight on... the Post Office Horizon Scandal A spotlight on... the Post Office Horizon Scandal

A spotlight on... the Post Office Horizon Scandal

We’re starting a new EWI series with A spotlight on… the Post Office Horizon Scandal which looks at how the Post Office failed to listen...
Wambura v Barrick TZ Ltd [2023] EWHC 2582 (KB) Wambura v Barrick TZ Ltd [2023] EWHC 2582 (KB)

Wambura v Barrick TZ Ltd [2023] EWHC 2582 (KB)

The case involved the question of whether the claimants should have permission to call expert security evidence.
Civil Procedure Rule Committee: Alternative Dispute Resolution consultation Civil Procedure Rule Committee: Alternative Dispute Resolution consultation

Civil Procedure Rule Committee: Alternative Dispute Resolution consultation

The Civil Procedure Rule Committee is consulting on proposed changes to the Civil Procedure Rules to ensure that courts consider alterative...
Expert evidence and an absent defendant Expert evidence and an absent defendant

Expert evidence and an absent defendant

A defendant who chose not to attend or be represented at trial, suggested that he might still instruct his expert witness to provide oral...
A Day in the Life of a Threat, Risk and Harm Consultant, Expert Evidence Trainer, and... A Day in the Life of a Threat, Risk and Harm Consultant, Expert Evidence Trainer, and...

A Day in the Life of a Threat, Risk and Harm Consultant, Expert Evidence Trainer, and...

EWI Honorary Fellow Tony Saggers has been a drug trafficking Expert Witness since 1995, alongside a career in law enforcement that spanned 30 years....
Forensic Science Regulator consultation on the code of practice Forensic Science Regulator consultation on the code of practice

Forensic Science Regulator consultation on the code of practice

The Forensic Science Regulator is consulting on the draft for the development of version 2 of the forensic science code of practice.

News

Jennings v Otis Ltd [2023] EWHC 2039 (KB)
Wiebke Morgan
/ Categories: Case Updates

Jennings v Otis Ltd [2023] EWHC 2039 (KB)

The case: the Appellant, an experienced lift engineer employed by the first Respondent, suffered the traumatic amputation of his arm when it became entangled in lift drive machinery which he was inspecting at the Second Defendant's premises. It is the Appellant's case that the drive machinery was inadequately guarded and the accident occurred when he stumbled or lost his balance and his arm bypassed what guarding was present and went into the moving parts. It is the case on behalf of the Respondents that the Appellant's version of events is implausible and the accident occurred because the Appellant deliberately chose to put his arm through a gap in the guarding in order to undertake some work on the machinery.

To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. 

Already a member? Login

Previous Article OXR v Mid and South Essex Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2023] EWHC 2006 (KB)
Next Article Kay Linnell and Tony Saggers awarded Honorary Fellowship of the EWI
Print
572
Comments are only visible to subscribers.