Adam Weitzman KC and Chris Canning together acted for the Claimant in the case of Mark Hemingway (a protected party) v Robena Contract Furnishings Ltd.

Mr Hemingway worked as a delivery driver. On 28 March 2018, he was tasked with transporting some industrial strip lights in a lorry. When he arrived, other workers unloaded the lights. As they did so, one of the lights fell. Mr Hemingway was hit on his head. He was badly injured. He was taken to hospital where a severe traumatic brain injury was diagnosed. He has not recovered, and he will require lifelong care.

The Defendant contested liability. HHJ Sadiq heard a 3-day, liability-only trial, at the County Court at Sheffield, between 8 and 10 February 2023. Judgment was handed down on 13 April 2023.

The issues on liability touched not only personal injury but also employment law. The first issue related to whether the Defendant employed the Claimant. It was agreed that the Claimant had initially been employed by an entity called Samuel Thomas. However, the Claimant contended that the Defendant became his employer shortly before the accident. Therefore, as his employer, the Defendant owed a non-delegable duty to him to provide a safe system and safe place of work. The Defendant’s case was that it did not employ the Claimant at the date of the accident. It said he was still employed by Samuel Thomas at that date. It admitted that, after the accident, it did then become his employer. It said that was only because it was considering purchasing Samuel Thomas, so it took into direct employment Samuel Thomas’ drivers, on a trial basis.

The Claimant’s alternative case was that, if the Defendant was not his employer at the date of the accident, by the later transaction by which the drivers were taken on by the Defendant, the Defendant inherited liability to him by operation of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006. The Defendant’s case was that the trial of the delivery drivers was not such a transfer because they were not a “stable economic entity” within the meaning of TUPE.

The Court heard evidence from the Claimant (as a vulnerable witness), his wife, the managing director of the Defendant, and a health and safety advisor.

Having heard the cross-examined evidence of these witnesses, the Judge rejected the evidence of the Defendant’s managing director. The Judge found him to be an unreliable witness: he had failed to disclose relevant documents; his oral and written evidence was inconsistent; and he was evasive when giving evidence. The Judge treated with extreme caution the documents completed at his direction.

HHJ Sadiq went on to find for the Claimant on both key trial issues. He found that the Defendant was the Claimant’s employer, but, if he was wrong about that, then on the correct application of the guidance in Cheesman v R Brewer Contracts Ltd [2001] IRLR 144 and other authorities, the employment of Samuel Thomas’ delivery drivers represented a transfer of undertakings such that TUPE applied, and Samuel Thomas’ liability to the Claimant for his personal injury transferred to the Defendant.

The Judge further rejected that the Claimant was contributorily negligent.

Directions will now be made to decide the quantum of the Claimant’s claim.

Adam and Chris were instructed by Kate Venn and Peri Baldwin of Irwin Mitchell LLP.


Related practice areas

For help or advice please call +44 (0)20 7242 3555 or complete 
the form below

A member of the Clerking team will help you resolve your request.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Frequently asked questions

Yes, please call Chambers mainline number +44 (0)20 7242 3555 and you will be directed to the out of hours phone lines.

As a direct access client, please visit our direct access page and complete the initial form, a member of the clerking team will then be in touch to discuss the next steps.

Choosing the right barrister for your case can be difficult, with so many to choose from. Our clerks will be happy to guide you with your choice. Their wealth of knowledge and experience will help you decide the right barrister not just for the case but someone who will work with you.

Some barristers have the ability to “conduct litigation” for direct access clients. Our clerks will be able to assist you as to which of our members are trained and accredited to do so.

Please visit our direct access page for the initial steps on instructing a barrister, or contact our clerks on +44 (0)20 7242 3555.


Shortlist Builder


Select the legal expertise that you would like to download or add to the shortlist

Download Add to shortlist
Shortlist close
Title CV Email

Remove All


Legal Expertise

7BR is a leading set with barristers providing expertise and assistance to clients across a broad spectrum of practice areas.