This is a preview. To continue reading please log in or Register to read this article

No place in the medical books for RSI

This report relates to 1 case(s)

  • expand disabled

    Mughal v Reuters Ltd [1993] IRLR 571 HC (0 other reports)

In Mughal v Reuters Ltd 28.10.93, High Court of Justice, the High Court dismisses a claim for damages for repetitive strain injury (RSI) arising from work with a visual display unit (VDU), brought by a journalist against his former employer. In holding that no specific injury was caused, the High Court also dismisses the concept of a RSI.