WRULD Claims heard in England, Scotland and Wales
References to and/or interpretations of HSE Guidance Documents - Routledge - v - Woolworths plc
| Display Screen Equipment Work: Health and Safety (Display Screen Equipment) Regulations 1992. Guidance on Regulations: L26 1992 | |
|---|---|
| The Schedule | Routledge - v - Woolworths plc | Find Other Cases |
There are references to both the 1992 and 2003 versions of the guidance on the Health and Safety (Display Screen Equipment) Regulations in paragraph 25 of the Judgment on the 18th November 2004:
The 1992 Regulations do not state where on the workstation the monitor should be located. At the time however the HSE advice of 1992 was in force. There are two relevant illustrations within that. The first is at page 33 and deals with "seating and posture for typical office tasks". It is a side-on illustration which shows the screen in front of the user as does the corresponding page in the 2003 up-dated Guidance. Page 32 of the advice shows a picture with the monitor and keyboard to the right. That illustration however deals only with "Subjects dealt with in the Schedules". The corresponding page in the 2003 Guidance has been drawn in such a way that the monitor is in front of the user (the old page 32 having been removed entirely). I am in no doubt that the interpretation of those drawings by [the Ergonomics Expert for the Claimant] is the correct one for the reasons she gives. In my view page 32 of the 1992 advice was never intended to give advice on seating and posture for typical office tasks
At paragraph 29 of the Judgment, HH Judge Sennitt says:
Having heard the ergonomic experts l am satisfied that I should prefer the evidence of [the Ergonomics Expert for the Claimant] rather than [the Ergonomics Expert for the Defendant] upon the important aspects where they differ. Both are experienced and well-qualified but such HSE Guidance, British Standard and up to date literature as there is seems to support the views of [the Ergonomics Expert for the Claimant] rather than [the Ergonomics Expert for the Defendant].
V2.02
There are references to both the 1992 and 2003 versions of the guidance on the Health and Safety (Display Screen Equipment) Regulations in paragraph 25 of the Judgment on the 18th November 2004:
The 1992 Regulations do not state where on the workstation the monitor should be located. At the time however the HSE advice of 1992 was in force. There are two relevant illustrations within that. The first is at page 33 and deals with "seating and posture for typical office tasks". It is a side-on illustration which shows the screen in front of the user as does the corresponding page in the 2003 up-dated Guidance. Page 32 of the advice shows a picture with the monitor and keyboard to the right. That illustration however deals only with "Subjects dealt with in the Schedules". The corresponding page in the 2003 Guidance has been drawn in such a way that the monitor is in front of the user (the old page 32 having been removed entirely). I am in no doubt that the interpretation of those drawings by [the Ergonomics Expert for the Claimant] is the correct one for the reasons she gives. In my view page 32 of the 1992 advice was never intended to give advice on seating and posture for typical office tasks
At paragraph 29 of the Judgment, HH Judge Sennitt says:
Having heard the ergonomic experts l am satisfied that I should prefer the evidence of [the Ergonomics Expert for the Claimant] rather than [the Ergonomics Expert for the Defendant] upon the important aspects where they differ. Both are experienced and well-qualified but such HSE Guidance, British Standard and up to date literature as there is seems to support the views of [the Ergonomics Expert for the Claimant] rather than [the Ergonomics Expert for the Defendant].
V2.02
Last updated: 14/05/2013