면책조항: 이것은 법률 자문이 아닙니다. 법률과 판례는 변경됩니다. 귀하의 특정 상황에 대해 항상 자격을 갖춘 변호사와 상담하십시오.

모든 판례
Tort Law
House of Lords
1951

Paris v Stepney Borough Council

[1951] AC 367

판결 이유

When assessing breach of duty, the seriousness of potential harm is a relevant factor. A greater risk of serious injury to a particular claimant may require greater precautions.

사실관계

Paris, a one-eyed man, was employed by the council as a mechanic. While hammering a bolt, a chip of metal flew into his good eye, blinding him completely. The council did not provide goggles, which was standard practice for two-eyed workers.

판결 요약

The House of Lords held the council liable. Although it might not have been negligent to fail to provide goggles to a two-eyed worker, the severity of potential harm to a one-eyed worker was much greater (total blindness vs partial impairment), requiring greater precautions.

주요 인용문

"The gravity of the harm which may be suffered by the workman is a relevant consideration in determining the precautions which the employer is bound to take."

Lord Normand

후속 처리

Good law

Cited as authority on the relevance of the severity of potential injury in breach of duty analysis.