Morrison v ISS Australia

In the matter of *Morrison v ISS Australia*, the applicant, Mr Morrison, sought to have his complaint regarding workplace safety dealt with by the Director of Mines and Resource Safety at the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP), rather than WorkSafe. The dispute centred on whether Mr Morrison's work at the Roy Hill Mine site, specifically plumbing and maintenance of accommodation, kitchen, office, and water treatment facilities, constituted "mining operations" or a "workplace" for the purposes of the *Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1994* (WA) (MSI Act).

The court was required to determine whether the facilities where Mr Morrison worked fell within the definition of "mining operations" or "workplace" as defined by the MSI Act. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the operation of residential and recreational facilities, and the ground used for them, located on a mining tenement and used solely in connection with mining operations, were included within the scope of the Act. Furthermore, the court needed to ascertain whether Mr Morrison's role in servicing and maintaining these facilities qualified him as an employee working in a "workplace" under the MSI Act, thereby directing complaints to the DMP rather than WorkSafe.

Judge Antoni Lucev reasoned that the evidence, though limited, indicated that Mr Morrison was engaged in the service and maintenance of catering and residential facilities. He found that these facilities, located on the mining tenement and used in connection with the Roy Hill Mine, were considered part of the "mining operations" and thus a "workplace" under the MSI Act. Consequently, the court determined that complaints regarding workplace safety in this context should be made to the Director of Mines and Resource Safety, who possesses the appropriate powers to seek compliance with the MSI Act. The court also noted that Mr Morrison had denied making a complaint to WorkSafe, stating he had only complained to the DMP.