[Closed] Accident liability?

Company paying for the work I reckon.

IANAL...but Immagonna guess at...

Injured guy will have to claim against your boss as it was an accident at work.

Your boss' insurance will claim against PL insurance of contractor.

Contractor - although your Employer has a legal right to ensure you have a "safe access and egress to your place of work".
Contractor is negligent and its their insurance that covers their liability.
The "issue" will be if "your mate" exercised DUE CARE AND ATTENTION. i.e - did he know there were workmen in? Did he see the workmen? Did he takes steps to ensure he was not entering an unsafe area regardless of if there were or were not barriers.
Expect all those questions and more - and then a "Without Prejudice" payout with no acceptance of liability on their part.

What DD said.

Also, ouch.

The "issue" will be if "your mate" exercised DUE CARE AND ATTENTION

One of the defining features of glass, it's raison d'etre almost, is that it's hard to see.

The "issue" will be if "your mate" exercised DUE CARE AND ATTENTION

One of the defining features of glass, it's raison d'etre almost, is that it's hard to see.

True Cougar - but the question will be IF he allowed sufficient room whilst walking past a workman going about his duties.
Having been there and answered questions you wouldn't think possible to be asked - trust me that the Insurance Company will make him wonder if he remembered to put his underpants on the right way that morning and if he REALLY is sure that he did.... 😛

the question will be IF he allowed sufficient room whilst walking past a workman going about his duties.

No. The workman should've cordoned off any hazards.

No. The workman should've cordoned off any hazards

Thanks for the replies, don't know if he's going down the claim route but will pass on the info. Think he's going to see how the recovery goes..

I'm old skool clearly - if that was me it would be chalked up as a bit of 'I'm clearly needing a trip to the opticians', a little bit of 'I hope a suitable bollocking has been issued' and a good dollop of 'I'll be [i]working from home[/i] with the test match on for the rest of the week and this won't be marked up as sick leave will it'. I don't think financial compensation would have been on my radar.

Normally I would too but,

14 stitches? Bugger that.

Yes he "should" have Cougar BUT the questions will still be asked as to why he didn't see the bucket/workman/area/etc.
The contractor is liable BUT what they will look at is how much liability he is carrying and whether the injured party was negligent in how he got hurt.
Not nice but that's how it works nowadays.
Been there, got the tshirt, book and DVD as both injured and employer.

Not nice but that's how it works nowadays

That's how it's always worked, it's just that the claims management industry likes to justify it's existence and inflated compensation payments.

He needs to formalise the claim quickly as paperwork, was he off work? was it reported as a RIDOR?

The contractor and client (your mates employer) are both liable, there should have been a "construction phase plan" in place for the work. I doubt this exists and you ideally need to go legal before they write it retrospectively

Overall. It's not your mates responsibility to avoid hazards he isn't aware of it's the contractor/ client. They have already either failed to write or adhere to a competent construction phase plan under CDM2015 for the works. They will both have insurance for this.

BTW, I've done daft things to myself at work and didn't even think of claiming. this is different in scale and responsibility