Director of Public Prosecutions v Downer EDI

The case of Director of Public Prosecutions v Downer EDI involved the Director of Public Prosecutions seeking advice from the court on the validity of charges laid under the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 (OHSA) against road management companies. The companies had been conducting road works where a worker was killed. The central dispute was whether the statutory duties under the Road Safety Act 1996 (RSA) and the Road Management Act 2004 (RMA) precluded the application of duties under the OHSA, and whether the OHSA charges were valid. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The court was required to determine several key legal issues, including whether the statutory duties under the RSA and RMA displaced the defendants’ duties under the OHSA, whether the RMA was inconsistent with the OHSA, and if there was an implied repeal of the OHSA by the RMA. Additionally, the court needed to examine the compatibility of the offences under the RSA and OHSA, and whether a policy defence available in civil proceedings could be applied in criminal proceedings.

The court found that the RSA duty to ensure road works were conducted safely did not displace the defendants’ duties under the OHSA. The RMA required compliance with the RSA but did not exclude the application of the OHSA, and there was no inconsistency between the acts. The court held that the OHSA charges were valid and that the RMA did not imply a repeal of the OHSA. Furthermore, the court concluded that there was no inconsistency between the offences under the RSA and OHSA, and the policy defence was not applicable in criminal proceedings.

The court declined to answer hypothetical questions regarding the inconsistency between statutes, as the determination of the validity of the OHSA charges was sufficient to decide the matter. The court's advisory opinion concluded that the OHSA charges against the defendants were valid and could proceed.