Lords decide door closer is work equipment

News | HSP
14.07.2008

The House of Lords has ruled that a door closer can be classified as work equipment under Regulation 2 of the Provision and Use or Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER).

The decision follows an incident in October 2003 involving Peter Spencer-Franks, an employee of Kellogg Brown & Root (a subsidiary of Halliburton) who was working under contract on a North Sea oil platform operated by Talisman Energy (UK).

Spencer-Franks had been asked to inspect and repair a closer on the door of the central control room. As he examined it, a screw hit him in the face. He lost four teeth, which had to be replaced with implants.

He brought a claim against KBR and Talisman Energy claiming that they had breached their duties under PUWER.

The House of Lords was asked to consider whether the door-closing device was work equipment. Applying the definition that if it was for use at work, then it was work equipment, the Lords concluded that the closer was in place on the installation for use at work. As such, it fell within the definition set out in Regulation 2(1) of PUWER.

The Lords rejected the argument that PUWER excludes apparatus that forms part of the structure of premises (or installation), and held that PUWER was intended to apply to all equipment on an offshore structure, regardless of whether it's integrated into the structure of the installation.

They also rejected the argument that inspecting and repairing the door closer did not constitute "use" under the Regulations.

Jan Burgess, of law firm Cameron McKenna, warned that the implications of the decision could be wide-reaching.

"I think it's very significant and also quite surprising," she told HSP. "It extends the definition [of work equipment] beyond what it was traditionally accepted to be."

Burgess does not think the judgment will mean there will necessarily be many more claims brought under PUWER, as incidents involving such items are few and far between. But she does believe employers will need to take a broader view of what is covered by the Regulations.

The full text of the judgment is available here.