Knapp v Railway Executive [1949] 2 All ER 508
Breach of statutory duty; whether employee had right of action under s274 Brighton and Chichester Railway Act 1844
Facts
Mr Knapp was approaching a railway level crossing in his car where the barrier was down. He accidentally let his car run into the barrier which was not appropriately secured in breach of statutory duty under s274 Brighton and Chichester Railway Act 1844. The barrier swung open and hit an oncoming train injuring the train driver. The train driver successfully sued Mr Knapp in negligence and he sought indemnity from the Railway Executive for breach of statutory duty for failing to secure the barrier.
Issues
Mr Knapp contended the 1844 Act placed the Railway Executive under a duty to employ proper people to open and shut the gates and railway crossings, and the statute was designed to protect those using the highway and the railway. The barrier was not appropriately secured and this breach of duty caused injury to the train driver who should, therefore, recover damages from them as a person whom the statute was designed to protect. The Railway Executive contended that the 1844 Act was designed to protect persons using the turnpikes and highways, and therefore, no right of action stemmed from an injury to an employee of the Railway Executive.
Decision/Outcome
Mr Knapp was unsuccessful in his claim for indemnity. The 1844 Act was unequivocally designed to protect persons using the highway and the benefit of the protections of the statute could not be claimed by an employee of the Railway Executive. The train driver had no right of action.
Updated 19 March 2026
This article accurately summarises the facts, issues, and outcome of Knapp v Railway Executive [1949] 2 All ER 508. The case remains good law as an illustration of the principle that a claimant must belong to the class of persons a statute was intended to protect in order to bring a claim for breach of statutory duty. The broader tort of breach of statutory duty has, however, been significantly affected by subsequent developments. In particular, the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 (s.69) removed the general right to bring civil claims for breach of health and safety regulations made under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, unless regulations expressly preserve that right. This does not alter the outcome or reasoning in Knapp itself, which concerned a Victorian railway statute, but students should be aware that the practical scope of breach of statutory duty as a tort has narrowed considerably in the workplace context since this case was decided.
