top of page
  • Writer's pictureRobert Spicer

Lichfield hand crush injuries: Rom Ltd fined £200,000

Crush injuries: £200,000 fine

Health and Safety Executive v Rom Ltd (2017) North Staffordshire Justice Centre, May 10

Statutory reference: regulation 11 of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER).

Rom Ltd, a steel manufacturing company, has been fined following an incident in which a worker suffered severe crush injuries to his hand.

The facts

· In October 2015 a worker at the company’s site in Lichfield, Staffordshire, was removing leftover steel from a Koch Straightener which was used for straightening steel wire.

· His hand was trapped between the rotating rollers inside the machine. He suffered serious crush injuries to his hand and lost the top of his right index finger.

· The company had failed to identify the risks associated with workers manually operating the machine.

· No steps had been taken to ensure that the machine was properly guarded. The company had also failed to provide required level of supervision for the activity.

The decision

Rom Ltd was fined £200,000 plus £17,000 costs for a breach of regulation 11 of PUWER.

Recent Posts

See All


Limitation Case TVZ v Manchester City Football Club Ltd [2022] EWHC 7, Hugh Court Facts Eight men who had been sexually abused by a football coach in the 1980s claimed compensation in negligence fro

Crown immunity and the rule of law (3)

Civil proceedings Until 1948 the Crown could not be made a party to a civil action. This was an offshoot of the principle of sovereign immunity. The Crown Proceedings Act 1947 changed this rule. The C

Crown immunity and the rule of law (2)

Recent examples In June 2018 prison officers were taking part in a petrol bomb training exercise. This was part of an eight-day commanders course at the National Tactical Response Group training facil


Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page