Who is Ultimately Responsible if the Safe Work System Fails in Uranium Mining?

摘要

One of the most significant issues faced by mine operators is the management of a workforce consisting of multiple contractors (and subcontractors) of differing specialised skills, complying with program and budget constraints and generally keeping their joint venturers satisfied whilst maintaining stakeholder relations. A key aspect to this management is a clear system to manage the safety risks inherent in mining.In uranium mining operations where so many parties can affect the safety arrangements of others (and indeed so many parties owe safety obligations), it is important to understand who is ultimately responsible for any failures in the Safe Work System.Whilst mining operators apply themselves to implement a Safe Work System, they should also consider the responsibility of the relevant parties should that Safe Work System fail. One of the most crucial factors in determining who is responsible under the Work Health and Safety Acts is the notion that each party must comply with its obligations to the extent it has the capacity to influence or control the matter. It is this capacity to influence or control that dictates the limits and requirements of the safety obligations of landholders, tenement holders, operators, specialised contractors, general labour contractors and subcontractors.This presentation will discuss:- the extent to which each relevant party may be responsible if the Safe Work System fails- recent case law that illustrates the importance of the capacity to influence and control as a limitation to risk of prosecution- how each relevant party can limit in a very practical way the risks of being prosecuted for a failure in the System- the personal liability of persons involved in those companies (including directors) responsible for a failure.We will also compare the factors for determining responsibility against environmental risk.