Speak to a member of our specialist international team of UK personal injury lawyers today on 0330 107 0107.
An abattoir accident at work involving a serious eye injury raised significant questions of employer liability, and IMD Solicitors LLP secured £110,000 compensation for the injured butcher. This case involved an experienced worker who suffered permanent sight loss after unsafe staffing, poor supervision, and the absence of a proper line-stoppage procedure combined to create a dangerous working environment.
Background and Nature of the Incident
Our client had spent several years employed as a butcher in a busy abattoir, working daily with sharp knives and high-speed production equipment. His usual position was as the fifth worker on a line where each employee carried out a specific cutting task as the carcass moved forward. The system relied on consistent staffing and competence to maintain a safe and predictable workflow.
On the day of the accident, three of the four workers positioned before him were inexperienced, and the only other experienced butcher was removed from the line by a manager shortly before the incident. This sudden reassignment left the line imbalanced and placed excessive pressure on our client. As the inexperienced workers failed to complete their tasks at the required pace, meat began to accumulate at his station, forcing him to perform additional work to correct earlier deficiencies.
He worked with a ten-inch knife of considerable sharpness, a standard piece of equipment in an abattoir. When he noticed that the accumulation of meat was becoming unmanageable, he attempted to stop the product from moving further down the line by placing his knife-holding hand on the carcass while simultaneously turning to alert his manager to stop the conveyor. The manager did not intervene. As he turned back, his hand slipped from the meat, and the knife travelled directly into his left eye.
The injury led to almost complete loss of vision in that eye. Although the eye remained structurally intact, the degree of visual loss had long-term implications, including reduced stereoscopic vision. Despite this, the client continued to work for the same employer, a testament to his determination and professional competence.
Legal Duties and Employer Failings
In assessing the claim, several breaches of duty emerged. Under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, employers must take reasonable steps to ensure the safety of workers. In addition, the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 and the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER) impose specific obligations relating to training, supervision, and safe use of equipment.
The following failings constituted clear breaches of those duties:
1. Inadequate Training and Competence
Three workers ahead of our client lacked sufficient experience. High-risk roles involving knives demand proper instruction and assessment of competence. Allowing inexperienced workers to operate without adequate oversight increased the risk to everyone on the line.
2. Removal of a Key Experienced Worker
The employer removed the only other experienced butcher from the production line without replacing him. This created foreseeable danger. A safe production system requires balanced staffing, especially in an abattoir where sharp instruments are used continuously.
3. Absence of a Safe System for Line Blockages
No clear procedure existed for stopping the conveyor when meat accumulated. This was a fundamental organisational fault. Production lines involving dangerous tools must include a clear, accessible stoppage mechanism and guidance on when it should be used.
4. Insufficient Supervision
The manager did not remain within sight or hearing of staff and did not respond when our client attempted to alert him. Failures of supervision often form the core of employer liability, particularly in industries where workers handle knives.
5. Excessive Workload and Fatigue
The combination of understaffing and accelerated workload increased the risk of an accident. Fatigue remains one of the most recognised contributors to workplace injuries.
Defendant’s Position and Evidence Gathering
The employer initially claimed that the butcher “stabbed himself in the eye” and argued that he alone was responsible for his injury. They referred to internal policies and witness accounts suggesting he should have acted differently based on his level of experience.
However, this view did not reflect the full circumstances. IMD Solicitors LLP carried out detailed investigative work:
- We interviewed multiple co-workers present on the day.
- We reconstructed the chain of events to demonstrate that the incident resulted from systemic failures rather than personal error.
- We reviewed training records, risk assessments, and staff deployment documents.
- We obtained medical evidence outlining the nature of the eye injury and long-term functional impact.
Our evidence demonstrated a consistent series of organisational failings. The claim was therefore advanced on the basis that the employer had not managed foreseeable risks, rather than on any allegation of fault by the injured employee.
Settlement Achieved
Following extensive negotiations, the employer accepted liability. A settlement of approximately £110,000 was secured to reflect the long-term consequences of losing almost all vision in one eye, the impact on future earnings, and the broader effects on daily life.
Conclusion
Serious eye injuries in abattoirs often arise from avoidable safety failures, and this case shows the level of compensation that can follow when employer liability is proven. A structured workflow, competent staffing, and immediate access to stoppage procedures are essential protections for employees working with knives on production lines. When these safeguards are missing, preventable harm occurs, and injured workers are entitled to full compensation for the long-term impact on their lives and careers. IMD Solicitors LLP continues to act for employees in similar high-risk environments, ensuring that workplace safety standards are upheld and that injured workers receive the compensation they are entitled to.
This article guide is for general information only and does not constitute legal or professional advice. This article was created on 04/02/2026. Please note that the law may have changed since this article was published.
