This case involved an incident at work in which the plaintiff alleged that he slipped on a wet grassy bank and injured his back during the performance of one of his daily tasks. The defendant argued that there was no need for the plaintiff to have taken the route, which had a steep incline, as there was another route within 10-15 meters which had little or no incline. The plaintiff argued that his predecessor, some 16 years previous, had taken the route when he was being shown his tasks and for this reason this was the manner in which he did his job and therefore it was an unsafe system of work.

The Court indicated that common sense should dictate and that the plaintiff should have taken the less steep route and that the plaintiff, as an employee, has a duty to take reasonable care for his safety particularly as he alleged that a work colleague had slipped on the same steep bank 8 months prior to the alleged accident.

The Court noted that despite the plaintiff's claim that he could barely drive and could not sit for more than one hour, he drove 120 km round trip to the Court and sat for 2 hours in the witness box. The Court stated that it was obliged to bring ordinary common sense to bear on what amounts to reasonable care by a plaintiff employee. They found that ordinary common sense should have prevailed where there was a steep, wet bank and a flat route only metres away. The Court concluded that the plaintiff did not take reasonable care for his own safety and by applying common sense principles dismissed his claim.
http://www.courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/09859e7a3f34669680256ef3004a27de/102310dd971fa7c08025828e00331ee7?OpenDocument