Expert Witness Journal Dec 24 - Journal - Page 9
returned to work in April 2016, Professor Pawlak/Dr
Skrzypiec reported (both directly, and through their
GP) that they considered themselves to be at risk of
psychiatric injury in the event of further contact with
the lab manager. On that basis, the court found that a
foreseeable risk of injury by the mechanism of contact
with the lab manager was established by May 2016.
tality of evidence adduced in this case that “the causal
link between life events and schizophrenia is highly
speculative and at best appears a very low risk factor”.
The court left open the question of whether a generic
link could be established between occupational stress
and the condition in any future case, depending on
any further research which is undertaken.
On the issue of alleged breach, both claims failed in
light of the court’s findings that the university had, in
fact, discharged its duty of care through a series of effective measures to reduce contact - which were both
reasonable and indeed ‘comprehensive’ - such that
contact was in fact minimal. The court held that the
university’s planning over this period, which had engaged HR, OH, and overview from senior academics,
had ensured fairness between the competing interests
of Professor Pawlak/Dr Skrzypiec and the lab manager. Guideline no 9 from Hatton, of course, expressly
refers to the need to ensure fairness to all employees
when considering redistribution of responsibilities.
Both claims were therefore dismissed.
Rory Holmes (Crown Office Chambers) acted for the
successful defendant, instructed by Barbara Goddard
of DAC Beachcroft Claims Ltd and Allianz Insurance.
Nick Harrison (9SJ Chambers) acted for the claimants,
instructed by Simpson Millar solicitors.
Our Disease Team deals with claims such as this on a
regular basis. For more information or advice, please
contact one of our experts,
https://www.dacbeachcroft.com/en/What-we-do/Services/Insurance/UK-Casualty/Disease?utm_source=Website&
utm_medium=ProductPage&utm_campaign=13052024Casualty-Disease-BarbaraGoddard
Author
Barbara Goddard
Partner, London
Barbara Goddard advises on all aspects of injury and
disease claims
Conclusion
Given its findings on liability, the court did not need to
make detailed findings on causation or quantum. The
court did however comment that, if it had found in
favour of the claimants, that it would not have been
prepared to find that work events had in fact accelerated the onset of the schizophrenia. Having considered the literature relied upon by Dr Skrzypiec’s
consultant psychiatrist, the court concluded on the to-
EXPERT WITNESS JOURNAL
+44 (0)207 894 6723
Email: bgoddard@dacbeachcroft.com
www.dacbeachcroft.com
7
DECEMBER 2024
