Tag: Duty of Care
-
Retroactive Rationalisation: The Judicial Rejection of Backward Reasoning in Safety Trials
The primary defence strategy employed by regulatory safety prosecutors post-incident is often built on an intuitive timeline: a catastrophic injury occurred, an engineering control was missing, therefore the employer failed to take all reasonably practicable steps to eliminate the risk. In a landmark determination, the Supreme Court of Victoria completely dismantled this approach. In SKM…
-
The jurisdictional shattering of the advisory shield—safety officers held criminally liable
A widespread misconception exists within corporate operations that work health and safety (WHS) professionals, general coordinators, and internal compliance auditors can routinely leverage general protections frameworks as an absolute shield against performance management or dismissal. Under this assumption, an individual’s legal obligation is perceived to be immunized the moment they lodge internal safety complaints, shifting…
-
The myth of voluntarism: Why standards still bind you despite what Standards Australia says
In the first quarter of 2017, Standards Australia issued a formal clarification that sent a minor shockwave through the legal and risk management departments of major industrial firms. In response to a series of technical inquiries regarding fall-arrest systems and engineered anchor points, the body stated a blunt truth: standards are, of themselves, considered to…
-
A look at liability in Elphick vs Westfield
The Court of Appeal in New South Wales considered Westfield’s liability to an employee of a cleaning contractor, ACS, that was injured in the course of performing cleaning duties at the Westfield Shopping Centre at Tuggerah. This post reviews the legislative background behind that case and looks at exactly where the liabilities are.
-
Labour hiring does not void responsibility
As the country moves closer to harmonisation organisations must ensure they fully understand the responsibilities of the PCBU (person who conducts business or undertaking). The definitions of ‘workers’ and ‘workplace’ in the new act are broad and will include more transparent responsibilities for contractors, labour hire personnel and work experience.