Adelaide Timber Co Pty Ltd v Shepherd (Worksafe Western Australia)

[2001] WASCA 110

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Industrial Law
2. › Occupational health and safety
3. › Employer's duty
4. › Provision of safe system of work
5. › Whether safe system sufficient without active supervision
6. › Whether employer failed to use due diligence to ensure system observed
7. › Occupational Safety and Health Regulations 1996 (WA), reg 4.37(1)(b)
1. Industrial Law
2. › Occupational health and safety
3. › Employer's duty
4. › Machinery guards
5. › Plant operating without guard
6. › Measures to prevent hazard as far as reasonably practicable
7. › Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984 (WA)
1. Evidence
2. › Inferences
3. › Failure to adduce evidence
4. › Whether inference of failure to supervise permissible where machinery found operating without guard and no evidence of supervisory procedures adduced

Quick Take

An employer who establishes a safe system of work (including written policies, induction training, refresher courses, and threat of dismissal for non-compliance) but leads no evidence of active supervision to ensure the system is observed will not have discharged its duty to provide measures to prevent hazards as far as reasonably practicable. Where machinery is found operating without a guard and no evidence of supervisory procedures is adduced, a court may infer failure to use due diligence.