Stapley v Gypsum Mines [1953] 3 AC 663

House of Lords

Basic Facts: Stapley and X, both employees, were instructed by the foreman to remove a dangerous roof chunk in a mine. They failed to do so and continued working. The roof chunk fell, crushing Stapley. A claim was brought on behalf of Stapley against his employer for breach of statutory duty.

Issue: How does contributory negligence apply when both parties are at fault?

Held: The court accepted the employer owed a statutory duty of care, but it was held that Stapley was 80% contributory negligent. Meaning the Plaintiff’s damages were reduced by 80%.

• Lord Porter (dissenting): Both the employer and employees were at fault. The employer failed to make the area safe, and S and D failed to follow instructions. S's return to work, despite the danger, was a significant factor in his death.

• Lord Reid (allowing the appeal): If S's fault alone caused the injury, he would get no damages. If the fault was shared, damages would be reduced proportionally. Both S and D were negligent, and their combined negligence led to the accident. The damages should be reduced accordingly.

💡Level up : It highlights the judicial approach to causation and how speculative elements can impact the allocation of fault.