Dusek & others (Claimant) v. Stormharbour Securities LLP (Defendant)
Introduction
On 6 June 2012 a Sikorsky S58-ET helicopter operated by a Peruvian company, HeliCusco, crashed at an altitude of some 16,026 ft above mean sea level into a mountain known as 'Mama Rosa' in the Andes mountain range in Peru. The helicopter disintegrated and caught fire, killing all 12 passengers and 2 crew on board.
One of those passengers was Mr Tomas Dusek who was an employee of the Defendant ("StormHarbour"), an independent global markets and financial advisory firm and an English limited liability partnership. Mr Dusek was in Peru for his work on a project ("the Project") known as "Nueva Esperanza" (New Hope) which concerned a proposed hydroelectric complex being built in the province of Carabaya in the region of Puno, south-east Peru. The helicopter had been chartered for the purpose of a visit to the proposed sites for the Project.
Mr Dusek's widow and children bring this claim under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 and the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934. It is alleged that StormHarbour was in breach of its duty as employers to provide Mr Dusek with a safe place of work, safe equipment and a safe system of working. Mr Dusek was 37 years old when he was killed and had two children then aged 8 and 5.
The trial
The present trial concerns liability only.* Although the issues raised involve various different parties, this action only concerns Mr Dusek and StormHarbour and I have had no evidence or submissions from any other companies or individuals involved in the tragic events of 6 June 2012. Any findings I make must be understood with those limitations in mind.
.
(* Financial matters will be decided later. SOP when not straightforward.)
The issues
The principal liability issues may be summarised as follows:
(1) Did the scope of StormHarbour's duty of care as employer extend to the HeliCusco charter and helicopter flight?
(2) If there was such a duty, did StormHarbour breach it?
(3) If StormHarbour did breach its duty, did that breach cause Mr Dusek's death?
.
....................
Full Judgment here ->
Dusek & Ors v Stormharbour Securities LLP [2015] EWHC 37 (QB) (19 January 2015)
....................
Conclusion
I find the Claimants' case on liability to be proved on the basis set out above.
The Claimants also put their case on different and wider grounds relating to the charter of the helicopter and the carrying out of the flight on the day in question. I have not found that wider case to be made out on the evidence.
StormHarbour's liability rests on what it did not do; not on what Acres or HeliCusco may or may not have done.
.