Source: Maritime New Zealand
A court’s decision this week to find a former Port of Auckland (POAL) CEO guilty in relation to the death of a stevedore, clarifies legislative health and safety obligations for senior officers of large companies.
Following the death of Pala’amo Kalati in August 2020, Maritime NZ filed two alternative charges against former POAL CEO Tony Gibson under the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 (HSWA), for a breach of his duties as an officer. Mr Kalati was killed in an accident while loading containers on a ship berthed at the port.
Judge Bonnar found in favour of Maritime NZ on the charge that alleged: that by failing to comply with his duty under s 44 to exercise due diligence to ensure that POAL complied with its duties under HSWA, Mr Gibson exposed POAL’s stevedores to a risk of death or serious injury, namely, the risk of being struck by objects falling from operating cranes.
POAL was also charged and previously pleaded guilty to two charges under section 48 of HSWA and was sentenced in late 2023 to a fine of $561,000.
Maritime NZ Director Kirstie Hewlett says she hopes this decision helps bring closure for Mr Kalati’s loved ones and the surviving victim, and clarity to the health and safety role of senior officers in large companies.
“I want to extend our deepest sympathies to Mr Kalati’s family, loved ones, and colleagues. And also to the other victim who was working closely with Mr Kalati at the time,” she says.
“The law Mr Gibson was prosecuted under was introduced following the Pike River tragedy to ensure officers of large companies take responsibility for the health and safety of their workers. We hope this result provides useful case law and clarification around the obligations, and helps prevent future tragedies.”
This was the first time an officer of a large complex company had been charged under the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, for a breach of health and safety duties.
“Once we have time to considered the judgment we will work with WorkSafe NZ and the Institute of Directors to see whether the insights in the case could usefully be used to further support those in officer roles to understand their responsibilities,” Ms Hewlett says.
“It is important to recognise that many officers in New Zealand take health and safety seriously and that this case was only taken after considering the harm caused, the compliance history on the port, and taking into account the broader public interest. As with any case it is important to understand the facts are specific to the case and what a reasonable Chief Executive would do in that situation.”
Maritime NZ will now take time to consider the judgement and await to learn if Mr Gibson will appeal. We will not be able to comment further at this time.