Stress at Work: Personal Injury Claims

Two years ago the Court of Appeal in Sutherland v Hatton confirmed that to succeed in a negligence claim for damages for injury to health caused by stress at work, an employee must establish not just causation (which requires clear medical evidence), but also foreseeability of injury, and a failure to take practical steps to alleviate the risk. The Court also emphasised that the threshold for bringing a successful claim was high. Now in Barber v Somerset the House of Lords has given general approval to this approach, with the caveat that the Hatton decision constitutes ‘useful practical guidance’ and does not have ‘anything like statutory force’.

The Lords stress that it is foreseeability of injury to health that is crucial, not just knowledge that an employee is affected by stress. Exposure to stress does not normally cause illness; something more is required to alert the reasonable employer to the danger of injury to health, and to bring the duty of care - to take steps to