Rate this!
John Maltby
Member - 7 posts
Whilst I have every sympathy with Mrs Corr for her loss, this decision has got to be a travesty of justice, If the company is to blame for Mr Corr's actions 6 years later then surely the NHS has to share some of the blame for their failure in his care also, the government must also be to blame for the sad state of this country. where will this blame culture end?
Rate this!
Lisa Dormon
Member - 15 posts
I may be wrong here, and happy to be corrected. But I assume that Mr Corr received some form of compensation benefit at the time of the accident. Would this amount not have included a element of money that should have been used towards Mr Corr receiving some form of counselling and/or future treatment?
Rate this!
Vincent Crosby
Member - 2 posts
I agree that this is tragic case but I doubt that the company could be held responsible for the suicide of Mr Corr. It must surely rest with the care services. Mental Health trusts have to have in place a sucide risk strategy. Is it not therefore the responsibility of the health care professionals that have failed in this case by not referring him on?
Rate this!
Craig Stuart
Member - 59 posts
What you seem to be forgetting Vincent, is that legally the company WAS held responsible for the suicide, notwithstanding the issues you and others have mentioned. This is indeed a tricky one. But, after all, if the company had been more stringent in it's risk assessment and approach to health and safety at work - because don't forget, they were at fault for this also - then it may well have avoided this tragedy in the first place.
Rate this!
Alex Gordon
Member - 13 posts
There is a straight line from the negligence on the part of the company, to the injuries sustained to the mental illness developed as a result of the injury done and the harm allowed to take place by the company.
Any possible amelioration of the outcome by a medical intervention does not alter the initial culpability.
A simple analogy would be if you shoot a man, who is initially saved by a medical intevention. He then dies of a complicating factor. He would not have required the medical intervention had he not been shot and therefore the "shooter" is ultimately responsible for the death.
Rate this!
Pasc Ruggiero, CFIOSH, FRSH
Member - 39 posts
Alex & Graig, I entirely agree with you both. Employers need to be aware that they will be held to account if they fail in their duties to protect people.
IBC Vehicles lost some money, Mr. Corr lost his life.
Rate this!
Anne McAllister
Member - 115 posts
This is a very sad case indeed .
What about protecting employees from bullying and the often devastating impact on health ?
This case has set a precedent and all employers need to be fully aware of their responsabilities towards their staff.
0 (0)
