Knowingly Recommending Equipment That Is Not Fit For Purpose
Who would be liable in an organisation is a trusted person was intentionally bringing in equipment that was not fit for purpose, in other words, it has not been industry tested or medically reviewed, and was, therefore, breaching Section 6 of the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974?
The short answer is that the company would be vicariously liable, which for means that the person bringing the equipment in, is not just acting dishonestly, but also (in my humble opinion) acting negligently and potentially fraudulently.
It is also a betrayal of trust and a conflict of interest and it could potentially lead to someone being injured, that would highly likely not have happened if they had used the equipment that was fit for purpose.
I’d be interested in your comments!
For years, organisations have declared that they will not tolerate violence or abuse towards staff.…
The publication of the NHS Violence Prevention and Reduction Standard represents one of the most…
When incidents escalate, staff often act instinctively. A teacher intervenes to stop a fight. A…
Yesterday’s corporate manslaughter appeal decision involving Air France Flight AF447 raises questions far beyond aviation.…
There are moments in frontline practice where an organisation’s policies, training, equipment, leadership and legal…
Because we understand what is at stake. NFPS programmes enable you to: Gain recognised BTEC…