2 total
An auto manufacturer was convicted of a safety violation for an unguarded raised platform.
The defendant, a motor vehicle manufacturer, was charged with failing to ensure that prescribed occupational health and safety measures were carried out at its Brampton facility.
Specifically, the defendant failed to install guardrails at an open side of a raised platform (the Underbody Re-Spot Station) where an employee fell and sustained serious injuries.
The defendant argued that section 20 of the regulation applied instead of section 13, that the platform qualified as an exempt "pit" and that it had exercised due diligence.
The court rejected all defences and found the defendant guilty, holding that guardrails were required under section 13(1)(b) of Ontario Regulation 851/90, that the platform was not a "pit" within the meaning of the exemption, and that the defendant had not taken all reasonable precautions.
The court allowed the appeal and set aside OHSA convictions, finding the trial justice erred by not requiring the Crown to prove the particulars of the charges.
An appeal from a conviction under the Occupational Health and Safety Act for two breaches arising from a workplace accident.
The appellant, an automobile reconditioning company, was convicted of failing to provide information, instruction, or supervision to a worker in the safe operation of vehicles, and failing to take reasonable precautions to ensure a worker who drove vehicles had a valid driver's licence and proper training.
The trial justice erred in law by finding that the Crown did not need to prove the particulars of the charges and by imposing unreasonable standards of care.
The appellate court found that the worker was hired solely to clean vehicles and was explicitly instructed not to drive, making it unnecessary for the employer to provide driving instruction or supervision.
The conviction was set aside and a finding of not guilty was entered.
