This appeal concerned the interpretation of "energized exposed parts of electrical equipment" under the Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.
O.1, specifically O. Reg. 213/91, ss. 184(1) and 190(4), following a worker's arc flash injury on a construction project.
The Court of Appeal for Ontario found that the appeal judge erred in her interpretation of s. 190(4), concluding that the actus reus for that offence was established, as the provision applies when work entails exposing ordinarily energized parts.
However, the Court upheld the acquittals for s. 184(1), finding the Crown failed to prove the temporal link between exposed parts and uncontrolled room access.
The Court also accepted a concession regarding the s. 187 due diligence defence.
The matter was remitted for determination of due diligence and sentence appeals for ss. 190(4) and 187.
