Description
Trial Judge should have tested her Process of Reasoning against the Evidence:The Court of Appeal so held in allowing an appeal against judgment in favour of a train driver under the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. The trial judge had found that sloping seats in the Defendant's trains had led to the aggravation of a painful pre-existing back condition suffered by the Claimant. However, the Court of Appeal noted that two ergonomic experts had given evidence that the seats did not pose a foreseeable risk of injury. The judge's analysis had not taken this evidence into account; had she tested her process of reasoning against the available evidence then she would have thought again and pulled back from error.
