Wilsons & Clyde Coal Co v English [1938] AC 57

• Plaintiff was injured in Defendant’s mine and sued Defendant for negligence.

• Defendant claimed that responsibility for mine safety was delegated to Defendant’s agent and therefore they were not responsible.

• HL allowed Plaintiff’s claim on the grounds that the duty to effect and maintain a safe system of work was not absolved by the appointment of someone to undertake that duty. 

Lord Wright

• The duty to take reasonable care for the protection of workers is threefold:

The provision of a competent staff of men, adequate material, and a proper system and effective supervision.

Lord Macmillan

• There are 2 key doctrines: The doctrine of vicarious liability and the doctrine of common employment (that a master is not liable where one servant injures another where they are both engaged in the same job) –NB ABOLISHED by legislation.

• In this case common employment does not apply since the agent employed to provide a safe system of work is not employed on the same task as ordinary workmen.