In the recent High Court decision of Easton v B & Q Plc the trial Judge had to determine whether or not B & Q had exposed Mr Easton to such stress in the workplace as to cause a foreseeable risk of psychiatric injury. On the facts of the case, B & Q was held not liable.
In 2004 Mr Easton was recruited by B & Q as a Unit Manager to manage one of its stores and subsequently progressed well within the business. At the beginning of 2007 Mr Easton was seconded to the head office of B & Q to lead a small team which implemented a structural change in the range of products available in stores. In July 2008 he was appointed as the manager of a B & Q store which was about to undergo a substantial refurbishment and he was considered a high performing manager capable of overseeing the project to a successful conclusion. The refurbishment was carried out successfully and the store performed well thereafter.