Skip to Content, Skip to Navigation
Advertisement

Safeguard OSH Solutions - Thomson Reuters

Safeguard OSH Solutions - Thomson Reuters



Alert24 - Safeguard Update

Kiwifruit: Round two

Kiwifruit: Round two
2018-11-02
Article Type:
News
Publication Date:
2018-11-02
Jurisdiction:
New Zealand

The questions from the floor following Gallaway’s presentation provided a different perspective on the Athenberry case, when the prosecuting barrister presented his side of the argument.

Ian Brookie said he believed that Athenberry, as land owner, had a measure of control, by the way it mowed its lawns and maintained its tracks, to direct where samplers could and couldn’t go on the site.

Although the formed tracks were in good condition, there was evidence, he said, that an area of mowed grass near the accident site may have deceived the sampler into believing it, too, was a track she could use.

In his view, he said, the case hinged on s33:3 of the HSW Act, which states that where more than one party has a duty of care, each party is responsible for discharging that duty by using their ability to influence and control to the fullest extent.

“This is the critical part of the decision and I have to say – with respect – that the judge got it wrong,” Brookie said.

Gallaway responded that, despite the acknowledged possibility of confusion about a mown path, the accident occurred in an area of long grass – something the sampler had been trained to identify as a hazard.

“That was your case, and you lost,” he told Brookie. “And WorkSafe had the ability to appeal but didn’t.”

 

 

People Mentioned:
Ian Brookie; Garth Gallaway
Organisations Mentioned:
Athenberry
Reference No:
181102CA-4369

From Alert24 - Safeguard Update

Table of Contents