The widow of a man who killed himself six years after an industrial accident should be compensated by his former employers, the House of Lords said this morning.

Five law lords upheld a Court of Appeal judgment of March 2006 that IBC Vehicles were responsible for the death of Thomas Corr, who threw himself from a multi-storey car park in May 2002.

His widow, Eileen, went to the High Court in April 2005 to sue for damages based on the pain and suffering caused by the industrial accident and subsequent suicide.

IBC Vehicles, which produces vans for Vauxhall Motors, admitted liability for the workplace accident but denied that it was responsible for the suicide.

A deputy judge awarded the widow £82,520 after finding IBC could not be held responsible for Mr Corr taking his own life.

Ms Corr, from Luton, Bedfordshire, appealed that decision and the Court of Appeal found IBC Vehicles was responsible for her former husband’s suicide.

IBC then appealed to the House of Lords which today confirmed that the company was liable.

Lord Bingham said: “In the present case Mr Corr’s suicide was not a voluntary, informed decision taken by him as an adult of sound mind, making and giving effect to a personal decision about his future.

“It was the response of a man suffering from a severe depressive illness which impaired his capacity to make reasoned and informed judgments about his future, such illness being, as is accepted, a consequence of the employer’s [actions].

“It is in no way unfair to hold the employer responsible for this dire consequence of its breach of duty, although it could well be thought unfair to the victim not to do so," he said.

At an earlier hearing the law lords were told how Mr Corr was disfigured by the accident when he was hit on the head by a metal panel. He later suffered from unsteadiness, severe headaches and had trouble sleeping. He became bad tempered and depressed, felt his life was not worth living and that he was a burden on his family.

In England and Wales, employees, or their dependents, are entitled to claim compensation for a workplace accident if they can pass the test of “reasonable forseeability” - whether it is reasonable to foresee that one event might lead to another.

But while there has always been a clear link between, for instance, a work accident and someone losing their sight in one eye, the issue of accidents leading to mental health issues with further consequences has always been more controversial.

Judges have struggled with how to define the term “reasonable forseeability” for many years and the law has not been updated in Parliament to take into account recent changes in both societal attitudes towards and medical understanding of mental health.

In their judgment, the law lords mention that until relatively recently suicide was illegal. They also highlight the fact that doctors now understand that suicide can be an involuntary act if the person involved is depressed, as Mr Corr was, and so it is possible to derive a direct link from an accident that caused depression to the suicide itself.

Jeff Zindani, a personal injury expert at solicitors Forum Law, said: “The House of Lords have recast the test of foreseeability for negligence with workplace accidents to accord with the reality of mental illness that stems from a traumatic event.

“As their Lordships remarked in this case, suicide was not a voluntary act by a man of sound mind but someone suffering from depression caused by an employers negligence.

“Whilst not opening the floodgates, it will clearly make claims involving consequential illness more straightforward.”

Lawyers Moran & Co and barrister Jeremy Cousins, QC, acted for IBC Vehicles.

Law firm Rowley Ashworth and John Foy, QC, acted for Ms Corr, whose case was funded by Unite, the trade union.

Explore Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Law Reports

• Student Law

Times Recommends

• The best legal yarns this Christmas
• Legal school 'earned £1m by exploiting bar course'
• Axe may fall on 5,000 more City lawyers