Logo

Arrow left dark

SFN Logo
Search...
News
Features
Case Reports
Jobs
Events
About
Advertise
Privacy Policy
Cookies
Modern Slavery
LinkedIn
Facebook
Twitter
Phone icon 01382 472315
Email icon newsdesk@scottishnews.com

Seaman injured aboard Marine Scotland vessel awarded over £4,000 in damages after
finding of contributory negligence
28 SEP 2022
Reading time: 5 minutes
WRITTEN BY:
User image
Mitchell Skilling
Seaman injured aboard Marine Scotland vessel awarded over £4,000 in damages after
finding of contributory negligence
An employee of Marine Scotland who was injured aboard a multi-purpose vessel has
been awarded £4,273 in damages by a sheriff after it was found he was partially
responsible for the accident.

Image
About this case:
CITATION:
[2022] SC EDIN 28
JUDGMENT:
External link
COURT:
Sheriff Court
JUDGE:
Sheriff K J Campbell
Paul Farley, who was employed as an Able Seaman aboard MPV Hirta on a fixed
term appointment, argued that he had lost potential future earnings after being injured
aboard a craft being loaded aboard the vessel.
The case was heard by Sheriff Kenneth Campbell in Edinburgh Sheriff Court. The
pursuer appeared personally, while the defenders were represented by Thomson,
solicitor.

Jarring injury
The duties of the pursuer aboard the Hirta included watch keeping, maintenance, and
working on the two rigid inflatable boats (RIBs) carried by the vessel. On 4 June 2016
the pursuer was working as a bow-man aboard a Delta RIB. The craft was being lifted
back aboard the Hirta using a crane when the pursuer moved towards its bow in an
attempt to balance it closer to the horizontal. He was not instructed to do this by
anyone on the Hirta.

The RIB was brought over the side and lowered to the cradle on the port side of Hirta.
The stern end touched the cradle first. The bow end came down sharply. The pursuer
was seated on the floor towards the bow at that time. As a result of the impact, the
pursuer suffered a jarring soft tissue injury to his lower back as well as an injury to his
right ankle.

Following an X-ray and CT scans at the Western Isles Hospital in Stornoway, no

fractures were noted. Keyhole surgery was later required in order to remove debris
from his right ankle. The pursuer did not return to work following the accident and
felt unable to enjoy his previous hobbies of cycling, mountain biking, hill walking,
and swimming. The pursuer’s contract with Marine Scotland reached its termination
date in August 2016.

It was the pursuer’s submission that the accident was not his fault to any extent, and
that he had lost out on potential future earnings due to the top position he had held on
the defender’s reserve list for a permanent position. For the defenders it was argued
that the pursuer’s significant experience working aboard RIBs and conduct prior to
the accident indicated a significant amount of contributory negligence.

Aware of the risks

In his decision, Sheriff Campbell said of the credibility of the pursuer’s evidence: “I
was satisfied the pursuer believed in the truth of what he told me in evidence.
However I formed the impression that his account of events is informed in part by the
constellation of symptoms which he attributes to his injuries on the day, not all of
which are subject of averments on record, and none of which was the subject of
evidence from a medical practitioner. I did not find some elements of the pursuer’s
evidence about events on 4 June 2016 to be reliable, because it was at variance with
the evidence of other witnesses, which, by contrast, was consistent on many key
points about these events.”

On the pursuer’s liability for the accident, he said: “I accept that there was shouting
from crew members as the RIB was being brought on board. Because of the concerns
I have about the reliability of some of his evidence, I do not accept the pursuer’s
evidence that people were shouting at him to move for’ard on the RIB. Rather, I
consider that his account that he decided for himself to do that is what happened.”

He went on to say: “The pursuer is an experienced seaman, and holds a number of

certificates in order to gain which I was told involved safety training. I accept the
evidence of all witnesses that on-board health and safety training was mandatory and
that included RIB training on a person’s first trip. Accordingly, I conclude that the
pursuer was or ought to have been aware of the risks in acting as he did. I therefore
find he was contributorily negligent. Taking a broad view of the evidence in the round
and having regard to the factors set out above, I assess that contributory negligence at
50%.”

On whether there was any loss of future earnings, he concluded: “The pursuer was not
on a full-time permanent contract, and no opportunity for one arose whilst the list was
live. Further, no evidence was led to demonstrate the extent to which the pursuer
might be unfit for work, nor was evidence led to confirm whether any ongoing
difficulties are attributable to the accident rather than other causes, for example pre-
existing conditions. I accordingly conclude there was no loss under this head of
claim.”

The sheriff therefore assessed loss of earnings at nil, with solatium of £5,080, interest
of £2,473, and services carried out by the pursuer’s sister valued at £1,000.

Share icon
Share this article:
Facebook
Twitter
Linked In

Logo light
LinkedIn
Facebook
Twitter
Phone icon 01382 472315
Email icon newsdesk@scottishnews.com
News
Chevron right icon
Features
Chevron right icon
Explore
Chevron right icon
Legal
Chevron right icon
© Scottish Legal News Ltd 2023
Design by:
Future Nature logo