Edinburgh sheriff recommends more action to ensure good practice in load security following death of HGV driver

About this case:

• Citation:
  [2026] FAI 8
• Judgment:
  External link
• Court:
  Sheriff Court
• Judge:
  Sheriff Iain W Nicol

James Murray died aged 54 on 17 August 2022 on the M8 motorway next to the Hermiston Gait roundabout after his vehicle toppled over as he was turning to join the westbound carriageway. The accident also resulted in the prosecution of his employer for contraventions of sections 2(1) and 33(1)(a) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.

The inquiry was conducted by Sheriff Iain Nicol at Edinburgh Sheriff Court, with the Crown’s submissions adopted by all other parties at the evidential hearing.

No straps on load

At the time of his death, Mr Murray was employed as an HGV driver by R Drummond (Carriers) Ltd, trading as Drummond Distribution, and at the time of the accident he was driving an HGV with a trailer containing 41 pallets laden with paper and plastic film. The load, which had a total of weight of approximately 24,156 kilograms, was below the trailer’s maximum capacity of 52 pallets and had not been secured to prevent it from moving.

The trailer was loaded by an employee of the consignor, Interflex, at their premises in Dalkeith, on the morning of 17 August 2022. Mr Murray did not ask the employee, Scott Brown, to put any straps onto the load, and Mr Brown proceeded on the basis that securing the load was the responsibility of the driver. At the point that the HGV left Interflex’s premises, the load was secured by use of the trailer’s inner load curtain and standard curtain-sides only.

At approximately 4pm that day, while negotiating a corner to join the M8 from the Hermiston Gait roundabout, the HGB overturned. Various drivers stopped to go to Mr Murray’s aid, with the first police officer to attend at 4:10pm noting that he was unconscious but breathing. However, despite efforts to extract him from the vehicle, he went into cardiac arrest and later died at the scene. The cause of death was recorded as head and chest injuries.

After conducting its own investigation following a referral to the Crown Office Health and Safety Investigation Unit, Drummond Distribution introduced a new risk assessment method statement for the securing of loads and a new induction programme requiring drivers to demonstrate their ability to secure loads safely. Following prosecution, the company also paid a fine of £120,000 after pleading guilty to the offences on indictment.

A widespread problem

In his determination, Sheriff Nicol said of the conclusions available from the evidence: “There were significant shortcomings in the system of work which Mr Murray was expected to operate by. Inadequate risk assessments had been prepared, and reasonable steps had not been taken, to mitigate the risks which those risk assessments ought to have identified in relation to load instability during transit. No communication took place between the employer and consignor in relation to implementation of the HSE Guidance (HSG136) (i) to reflect who required to do what in relation to securing the load; and (ii) for the purpose of monitoring compliance of the driver and loader to ensure the load remained in a safe and stable condition until it reached its destination.”

He added: “Nothing is said in the risk assessment regarding the hazard of the load moving during transit. The Drummond Distribution drivers who had been interviewed as part of the investigation showed a varied understanding, and, on occasion a misunderstanding, of load security requirements. Nina Day [a HSE officer who provided support to the investigation into Mr Murray’s death] states this is not unusual and indeed is widespread throughout the haulage industry.”

Noting the improvements made by Drummond Distribution after the accident, Sheriff Nicol said: “I have seen nothing to suggest that Interflex have reviewed their health and safety procedures in the same way that Drummond Distribution have. If that has not been carried out by Interflex, I recommend they do so immediately. They should review existing (or prepare new) risk assessments, identify the hazards in a loading operation, put practices in place to ensure the HSE and DVSA guidance along with their obligations under the Road Traffic Act 1998, Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 are complied with.”

He concluded: “A system of independent auditing across the haulage industry would be highly desirable, but no evidence was led as to whether it is feasible. I therefore stop short of recommending that such a scheme is put in place. I confine the recommendation to considering what can be done to improve compliance with the existing legal requirements for load security. Many professional bodies and businesses utilise peer review and independent auditing to ensure compliance with rules and regulations with appropriate sanctions for non-compliance. It is clear from the material submitted to the Inquiry that some haulage operators are utilising the services of compliance auditors. However, there is a widespread problem where the risks associated with insecure loads still exist despite the extensive work undertaken by Ms Day, and others, in disseminating information to the haulage industry.”

Sheriff Nicol therefore further recommended that DVSA and HSE jointly consider how best to improve compliance in the industry and concluded the inquiry by offering condolences to Mr Murray’s family.