JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
TITLE OF COURT : THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)
CITATION: REILLY -v- DEVCON AUSTRALIA PTY LTD [2008] WASCA 84
CORAM: STEYTLER P
MILLER JA
NEWNES AJA
HEARD: 6 FEBRUARY 2008
DELIVERED : 17 APRIL 2008
FILE NO/S: CACR 68 of 2007
BETWEEN: PETER JOHN PATRICK REILLY
Appellant
AND
DEVCON AUSTRALIA PTY LTD
Respondent
ON APPEAL FROM:
Jurisdiction : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram :MURRAY J
Citation :REILLY -v- DEVCON AUSTRALIA PTY LTD [2007] WASC 106
File No :SJA 1118 of 2005
Catchwords:
Occupational health and safety - Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984 (WA) - Control of workplace - Contractor - Circumstances in which a principal will be 'deemed employer' of a contractor - Relative expertise
Occupational health and safety - Definitions - Meaning of 'control' - Meaning of 'matters over which he has control' - Meaning of 'practicable'
Legislation:
Factories Act 1961 (UK), s 29(1)
Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1994 (WA), s 9(1)(a)
Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984 (WA), s 3(1), s 5, s 19, s 20, s 21, s 22, s 23
Occupational Health and Safety Act 1985 (Vic), s 21
Occupational Health, Safety and Welfare Act 1986 (SA), s 4(2), s 19(1)
Result:
Appeal dismissed
Category: A
Representation:
Counsel:
Appellant: Mr G W Tannin SC & Mr T C Russell
Respondent: Mr R W Richardson
Solicitors:
Appellant: State Solicitor for Western Australia
Respondent: DLA Phillips Fox
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Chugg v Pacific Dunlop Ltd (1990) 170 CLR 249
Complete Scaffold Services Pty Ltd v Adelaide Brighton Cement Ltd [2001] SASC 199
Hamersley Iron Pty Ltd v Robertson (Unreported, WASC, Library No 980573, 2 October 1998)
Humberstone v Northern Timber Mills (1949) 79 CLR 389
Morrison v De Bono [2005] WASC 271; (2005) 147 IR 454
Nimmo v Alexander Cowan & Sons Ltd [1968] AC 107
R v ACR Roofing Pty Ltd [2004] VSCA 215; (2005) 11 VR 187
R v Associated Octel Ltd [1994] 4 All ER 1051
Reilly v Devcon Australia Pty Ltd [2007] WASC 106
Reilly v Tobiassen [2008] WASC 6
Stratton v Van Driel Ltd [1998] VSC 75; (1998) 87 IR 151
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT: This appeal concerns the construction of s 19(1) and s 19(4)(a) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984 (WA) (Act).
On 18 September 2002 Mr Desmond Kelsh died as a result of the collapse of a building under construction in Myaree, south of Perth. The building under construction consisted of a series of showrooms in an area known as 'Melville Square'. Glenpoint Nominees Pty Ltd (Glenpoint) was the lessor of the land comprising the building site (Myaree site). The respondent (Devcon) was related to Glenpoint. The two companies had common directors and shareholders. Devcon was in charge of the development on the Myaree site. It engaged labour and ordered materials needed for the building process, although invoices in respect of these were paid by Glenpoint.
The showrooms were…
Continue reading Reilly v Devcon Australia Pty Ltd
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Reilly v Devcon Australia Pty Ltd [2008] WASCA 84
- Case
- [2008] WASCA 84
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court examined the definitions and interpretations of key terms within the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984 (WA), specifically focusing on the meanings of 'control','matters over which he has control', and 'practicable'. The court also considered the extent of control that Devcon had over Kefo, the company that employed Mr Kelsh, and whether this control was sufficient to deem Devcon as the employer under the Act. The central question was whether Devcon's relationship with Kefo and their oversight of the construction project were enough to hold Devcon accountable for the safety of Kefo's employees, including Mr Kelsh. The court's reasoning involved a detailed analysis of the contractual arrangements, the degree of control exercised by Devcon over the construction processes, and the relative expertise of the parties involved.
In its judgment, the court concluded that Devcon did not have sufficient control over Kefo to be deemed the employer of Mr Kelsh under the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984 (WA). The court found that while Devcon had significant control over the construction process and the site, it did not have the requisite control over Kefo's employment practices and day-to-day operations to be considered the employer. Consequently, the court ruled that Devcon was not liable for Mr Kelsh's death under the Act. The appeal was dismissed, and the prosecution of Devcon and Glenpoint was quashed.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.