Walker v Northumberland County Council
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 16 November 1994 |
| Date | 16 November 1994 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
Negligence - Duty of care to whom? - Employee - Social services manager of local authority - Increasing caseload causing breakdown - Subsequent return to work on promise of assistance - Further breakdown when assistance not continued - Whether employers owing duty of care - Whether psychiatric damage reasonably foreseeable
The plaintiff was employed by the defendant council as an area social services officer, responsible for four teams of field workers in an area in which during the 1980s child abuse references were particularly prevalent. During that period the volume of work rose considerably without any increase in staff. In November 1986 the plaintiff suffered a nervous breakdown, resulting from the impact of his work on his personality. He returned to work in March 1987 on the understanding that he would receive certain assistance with his duties for as long as was needed, having received medical advice that he should not go back to the same level of work responsibility. Within a month that support was withdrawn. Meanwhile the number of childcare cases continued to increase and staff numbers remained the same, and by September 1987 the plaintiff was once again suffering from a stress-related anxiety. In February 1988, following a further breakdown, he was dismissed on the ground of permanent ill health. The plaintiff brought an action against the council alleging breach of its duty of care as his employer in failing to take steps to avoid exposing him to a health endangering workload.
On the action:—
Held, giving judgment for the plaintiff, that there was no logical reason for excluding the risk of psychiatric damage from the scope of an employer's duty to provide his employee with a reasonably safe system of work and to take steps to protect him from risks that were reasonably foreseeable; that such a duty called for no more than a reasonable response, measured by the nature of the neighbourhood relationship, the magnitude of the risk of injury, the seriousness of the consequence to the employee and the practicability of preventing the risk; that, on the evidence, though it was reasonably foreseeable by 1985 that by reason of stress of work there was some risk that the plaintiff might sustain a mental breakdown, it was not reasonably foreseeable that the plaintiff's workload gave rise to a risk of stress-induced mental illness materially higher than that which would ordinarily affect a social services middle manager with a really heavy workload; but that in 1987 the council ought to have appreciated that the plaintiff was distinctly more vulnerable to psychiatric damage than he had appeared to be in 1986 and that, when the support was withdrawn, there was a significantly greater risk of injury to his health unless the workload could be substantially reduced; and that, in failing to provide additional assistance, notwithstanding that on the evidence it could be expected to have some disruptive effect on the council's provision of services to the public, the council had acted unreasonably and was in breach of its duty of care (post, pp. 710C–D, 711A–C, 713C–E, 716F–H, 717D–F, 719F–H, 721F–722A).
The following cases are referred to in the judgment:
Anns v. Merton London Borough Council [
Bolton v. Stone [
Gillespie v. Commonwealth of Australia (
Glasgow Corporation v. Muir [
Herrington v. British Railways Board [
Johnstone v. Bloomsbury Health Authority [
Latimer v. A.E.C. Ltd. [
Lavis v. Kent County Council (
Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Ltd. v. Miller Steamship Co. Pty. [
Paris v. Stepney Borough Council [
Petch v. Customs and Excise Commissioners [
Watt v. Hertfordshire County Council [
The following additional cases were cited in argument:
Brown v. John Mills & Co. (Llanidloes) Ltd. (
Dixon v. Cementation Co. Ltd. [
Fitzsimmons v. Northumberland Health Authority (
Latimer v. A.E.C. Ltd. [
Stovin v. Wise [
The following additional cases while not cited in argument were put before the court:
General Cleaning Contractors Ltd. v. Christmas [
Hughes v. Lord Advocate [
Roberts v. Dorset County Council (
Speed v. Thomas Swift & Co. Ltd. [
Wilsons & Clyde Coal Co. Ltd. v. English [
Action
By a writ dated 3 April 1989 the plaintiff, John Edward Walker, brought an action against the defendants, his former employers, Northumberland County Council, for damages for personal injury due to their negligence.
The facts are stated in the judgment.
Brian Langstaff Q.C. and Andrew Buchan for the plaintiff.
Simon Hawkesworth Q.C. and Richard Craven for the defendant.
16 November. Colman J. The plaintiff, Mr. Walker, worked for the defendants, the Northumberland County Council, as an area social services officer from 1970 until December 1987. His position was one in middle management. He was responsible as manager for four teams of social services field workers in the Blyth Valley area of Northumberland. His office was at Cramlington. He in turn was answerable to the assistant director of the field services division of the council's social services department (“the department”). That was Mr. D. N. Davison. His office was at County Hall, Morpeth.
Blyth Valley was one of five social service divisions in Northumberland. It was a predominantly urban area and comprised a new town development at Cramlington with a relatively high proportion of young families with children many of whom had recently acquired houses which had previously been local authority housing. It was an area which because of the social profile of the population was particularly productive of childcare problems falling within the ambit of responsibility of the department. Amongst these problems in the course of the 1980s child abuse references were particularly prevalent. The population in Blyth Valley rose during this period and so did the volume of work which had to be undertaken by Mr. Walker and his teams of field workers. Although the number of field workers in the area had been increased during the period 1974 to 1978, there was no increase after 1978. By 1986 the pressure of work on those social service workers who were working in Blyth Valley had become very considerable. Not only were the teams of field workers under increased pressure, but so was Mr. Walker. The stress and anxiety created by that work pressure was intense. The increasing incidence of child abuse cases was particularly stressful for all concerned: for the field workers whose cases they were and who had to deal directly with the families and children and for Mr. Walker whose responsibility it was to make provision for the adequate manning of such cases by his teams of field social workers and for the holding of case conferences and the production of reports in respect of each child referred to the department in his area of Blyth Valley.
At the end of November 1986 Mr. Walker suffered a nervous breakdown. He suffered from mental exhaustion, acute anxiety, headaches, sleeplessness, irritability, inability to cope with any form of stress and a tendency to weep and to become upset. Under medical advice he remained off work until 4 March 1987. Mr. Walker was 50 on 10 March 1987.
While off work Mr. Walker was treated by his family doctor and was seen by Dr. D. A. Stephens, a very experienced psychiatrist who had known him professionally for many years by reason of Mr. Walker's social services work. Mr. Walker had no previous history of mental disorder and Dr. Stephens observed that “his anxieties are sharply focused on work pressures, while a comprehensive review of all other areas of his life fail to produce any evidence of concurrent problems.” He had known Mr. Walker “as a stable, industrious and committed colleague for many years and was suprised to hear about his recent difficulties.” It is common ground that Mr. Walker's illness was attributable to the impact on his personality of his work.
By 11 February 1987 Mr. Walker had discussed his position in the department with Mr. Davison, his immediate superior. Dr. Stephens had advised Mr. Walker that he should not go back to the same level of work responsibility as before. Mr. Davison was very sympathetic and concerned that Mr. Walker should settle back into his old job as Blyth Valley area officer. Mr. Walker made it clear to Mr. Davison that it was necessary to take the pressure off his job by splitting the Blyth Valley area into two divisions. To this Mr. Davison did not agree. However, in the course of their discussion it was agreed that Mr. Walker would on his return to work be assisted in his duties as area officer by Mr. R. D. Robinson, a principal field work officer, who had already been sent from County Hall to the Cramlington office to cover for Mr. Walker during his illness. Mr. Walker was given to understand...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Berber v Dunnes Stores Ltd
...the two causes of action because, as the English High Court (Colman J.) pointed out in Walker v. Northumberland County Council [1995] 1 All E.R. 737 (at p. 759), "the scope of the duty of care owed to an employee to take reasonable care to provide a safe system of work is co-extensive with ......
-
Curran v Cadbury (Ireland) Ltd
...illness that might result from negligence or from harassment or bullying in the workplace. In Walker -v- Northumberland County Council [1995] 1All E.R. 737 the English Courts imposed liability where the plaintiff foreseeably suffered a nervous breakdown because of unreasonably stressful wor......
-
McGrath v Trintech Technologies Ltd
...from stress in employment in what was described by Hale L.J. as "the landmark case" of Walker v. Northumberland County Council [1995] 1 All E.R. 737. The plaintiff, Mr. Walker, had been employed by the defendant local authority as an area social services officer from 1970 until 1987. He was......
-
Fletcher v Commissioner of Public Works
...As under s49 of the Civil Liability Act, 1961. 18 682 NE 2D 253 19 25 Cal Rptr 2d 550 20 512 US 532 21 117 SCT 2113 22 993 SWR 2D 88 23 (1995)1 All ER 737 Fletcher v. Commissioners of Public Works Stephen Fletcher Plaintiff and Commissioners of Public Works Defendant [S.C. No. 80 of 2002] S......
-
Employers' Liability at Common Law: Two Competing Paradigms
...owes a general duty of care to employees regarding psychiatric injury was established in Walker v Northumberland County Council.2727[1995] 1 All ER 737. Since Walker, an extensive body of case law has developed regarding the duty of care in this context.2828The definition of an employer's d......
-
Liability for Work Stress: Kohler Ten Years On
...the first edition of Handford, above n 7. Interestingly, Gillespie v Commonwealth was not cited by either Miles CJ or the Full Court. 16[1995] ICR 702. 17[1992] 1 QB 333. 154 University of Western Australia Law Review Volume 39(2) contract did not provide a good defence: according to Stuart......
-
"That Is Not How the Common Law Works": Paths to Tort Liability for Harassment.
...(2009) 111:3 Cognition 364. (92) See e.g. Wilkinson, supra note 38. (93) For England, see Walker v Northumberland County Council, [1995] ICR 702, [1995] 1 All ER 737 (QBD) [Walker]; Hatton v Sutherland, [2002] EWCA Civ 76 at paras 7-10 [Hatton]. See also Khorasandjian, supra note 67 at 736.......
-
Contractual rights and remedies for dismissed employees after the 'employment revolution'.
...(22 October 2010) [119]-[120] (Hall J). (86) See text accompanying above n 66. (87) See, eg, Walker v Northumberland County Council [1995] 1 All ER 737, 759-60 (Colman J); Moores v Bude-Stratton Town Council [2001] ICR 271,287 [45] (Lindsay J), which involved unjustified allegations regardi......