top of page
  • Writer's pictureRobert Spicer

Work experience teenager seriously injured: Radwell International Ltd fined £86,000

Work experience injury: £86,000 fine

Health and Safety Executive v Radwell International Ltd (2016) Stafford Crown Court, December 2

Statutory reference: ss 2 and 3, Health and Safety at Work, etc, 1974 (HSWA).

Radwell International Ltd, a supplier of industrial equipment, has been fined after a work experience person suffered serious injuries.

The facts

  • A work experience teenager was working at the company’s site in Newcastle.

  • During the unloading of a heavy electrical panel form the back of a lorry, the teenager was asked to steady the panel which had been placed on a wooden pallet on the ground.

  • The panel fell and trapped him on the ground across the forks of a forklift truck. He suffered five fractures of his pelvis and a head injury.

  • The company had failed to carry out a suitable and sufficient risk assessment, training, supervision and communication.

The decision

The company was fined £86,000 plus £12,000 costs for breaches of ss 2 and 3, HSWA, for failing to ensure the health and safety of employees and non-employees.

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