We are operating at reduced capacity due to COVID-19 Alert Level Three restrictions. Please only call our 0800 number if someone is at serious risk of harm or has been seriously injured, become seriously ill, or died as a result of work.
For other notifications please complete our online forms at Notify WorkSafe.
Court Summary - at a glance
It was reasonably practicable for the Defendant to:
- Develop, document, communicate and implement a Traffic Management Plan (the Traffic Management Plan);
- Demarcate and provide sufficient signage and cautionary markings for all restricted areas and pedestrian walkways at the site;
- Identify the driveway area in front of the workshop as a ‘no standing’ zone; and
- Provide convex mirrors in areas to assist vehicles moving around the site; including the building and workshop.
The Defendant’s Hazard Register and minutes of team meetings identified moving vehicles as a significant hazard, however, they failed to identify or implement steps to eliminate or isolate the risk. Instead, the Defendant relied on administrative controls, such as suggesting that customers are escorted to wait in reception, but even these controls were not consistently adhered to.
There was no signage telling the victim that he should not be waiting in the area and there was no demarcation setting out where he could or could not stand.
As such Mr Jacobsen was left waiting, and using his phone, for a period of at least 18 minutes. During this time vehicles continued to be driven in the area where he was standing. No one asked him to move or warned him not to take calls in the area. "