ESB worker awarded €45,000 for 'tennis elbow'

A HIGH Court judge has awarded €45,000 damages to an ESB worker after finding the ESB breached health and safety regulations in providing an unsuitable heavy compression tool to him which caused or contributed to him developing "tennis elbow".

Mr Justice John Quirke made the award yesterday to Kevin Doyle (55), a cable jointer, after finding Mr Doyle had established his use of the Pfisterer compression tool for crimping cables caused, or contributed to, his "tennis elbow". Insofar as Mr Doyle was concerned, the tool was not suitable for the relatively heavy manual work he was required to do, the judge found.

He also noted the evidence had established that hydraulically-operated and battery-powered tools were available between 1993 and 1996 which could have been used by Mr Doyle to do his job without risk to his health or safety.

The judge ruled the ESB had breached the "very strict duty" under Regulation 19 of Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Regulations of 1993 to ensure that the work equipment, particularly the compression tools which Mr Doyle was required to use in the course of his work, were suitable and posed no risk to his safety and health.

Regulation 19 created "virtually an absolute" duty to ensure workers were provided with suitable tools, he noted.

He ruled Mr Doyle was entitled to damages of €45,000 for his injuries and disruption to his life from February 1993, when the regulations came into effect, until September 1996 when he was placed on lighter duties with the ESB.

In his action, Mr Doyle, a father of one, Dromawling Road, Beaumont, Dublin, claimed he suffered a recurrent injury to his elbows and right thumb from using the Pfisterer compression tool, a large bolt-cutter type instrument used on heavy duty cables.

The ESB had denied negligence or breach of duty and an agent for Pfisterer had told the court he had sold more than 700 such tools and had never received any complaint of injury of the type sustained by Mr Doyle.

Mr Doyle first went to his doctor complaining of pain and discomfort in his right elbow in 1991. The doctor diagnosed "tennis elbow" and prescribed anti-inflammatory medication.

Apart from a small amount of persisting pain, he did not have any other problems until October 1995 when he again complained of painful and tender elbow joints, and believed that the pain was aggravated by having to lift and stretch his arm in the course of his working day.

He underwent physiotherapy which eased the pain, but when he returned to work his condition worsened and he was out of work for some six months in 1996.

After his doctor wrote to the ESB saying he believed Mr Doyle's work was causing his injuries he returned in September 1996 and was placed on light duties and remains on those.

In addition to finding a breach of Regulation 19, Mr Justice Quirke also yesterday upheld Mr Doyle's claims that the ESB had breached its duty under Section 12 of the 1989 Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act to prepare a safety statement.

Mr Justice Doyle also ruled that the company breached its duty under Section 10 of the 1993 regulations in not preparing a written health and safety risk-assessment in relation to Mr Doyle's work to decide if any protective measures should be taken, or if certain protective equipment should be used.

On the evidence in this case, the ESB may still be in breach of that Section 10 duty, he added.