In a negligence action arising from a fatal swing‑stage collapse during construction, a defendant moved to compel answers to numerous refusals given by the Ministry of Labour’s representative during discovery.
The Ministry argued that questions relating to inspector training, experience, workload, and inspection decisions were irrelevant because they concerned non‑justiciable core policy decisions involving allocation of governmental resources.
The court held that it was premature on a refusals motion to determine whether the inspection decisions were policy or operational, and that the pleadings alleged negligent inspection and failure to enforce safety obligations under the Occupational Health and Safety Act.
As a result, questions concerning the inspector’s qualifications, workload, sector plans, internal guidelines, prior incidents, and certain post‑incident changes were relevant and proportionate.
Most refusals were ordered answered, some were dismissed, and costs were awarded to the moving defendant.
