The appellants, an employer and a supervisor, appealed their convictions under the Occupational Health and Safety Act after a worker was seriously injured by a wood splinter ejected from an industrial saw.
The trial judge had convicted them, finding they failed to exercise due diligence because there was 'no evidence' of a system to regularly check and clean the saw's anti-kickback fingers.
The appeal court found this conclusion was unreasonable as it contradicted the uncontradicted and unrejected testimony of a worker who detailed his daily cleaning and maintenance routine.
The appeal was allowed and acquittals were entered for both appellants.