Thiess Pty Ltd v Industrial Court of New South Wales

Thiess Pty Ltd sought judicial review of decisions made by the Industrial Court of New South Wales, both at first instance and on appeal. The underlying dispute concerned charges brought against Thiess under the *Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000* (NSW). The Court of Appeal was required to consider whether the decisions of the Industrial Court were affected by jurisdictional error.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were the proper interpretation of the phrase "exposed to risks" as used in section 8(2) of the *Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000*, and whether the prosecution was required to prove actual exposure to a risk or merely proximity to a risk. Additionally, the Court had to determine whether prerogative writs should issue in respect of the orders of both the Full Bench of the Industrial Court and the Local Court, given that the Local Court's decision had previously been found to be vitiated by jurisdictional error. Inconsistencies in the findings of fact made by the magistrate in the Local Court were also a relevant consideration.

The Court of Appeal found that the interpretation of "exposed to risks" did not necessitate proof of actual exposure, but rather that proximity to a risk was sufficient. The Court also determined that the jurisdictional error found in the Local Court's decision did not automatically vitiate the subsequent decision of the Full Bench of the Industrial Court. Consequently, the application for prerogative writs was dismissed, with costs awarded to the respondent.