The judge agreed with Unite that Spalding should have been supplied with waterproof clothing and a mat to work in damp and wet conditions which could have exposed him to injury or illness and found the university liable. The university appealed, arguing that there was no evidence of risk of injury and that the protective clothing and mat was just for comfort and convenience, as opposed to the risk of personal injury required by the regulations. There was evidence that Spalding and his colleagues had asked for a mat to be provided many times. The judge dismissed the university’s appeal.