A low-speed vehicle collision on an ACT building site, which caused a chain of events that injured a worker, has highlighted the importance of effective traffic management.
The ACT Supreme Court ordered truck driver Ronald Walker, and CTR Pacific Pty Ltd, to pay the worker $303,394 each in damages.
The worker also sued principal contractor Construction Control ACT Pty Ltd, and his employer Tereel Pty Ltd (trading as Celtic Plastering Company), but the Court found they were not liable.
In March 2001, Walker delivered a truckload of sand to the building site and was instructed on where to dump the sand by a CTR Pacific worker.
While slowly reversing, the truck's tailgate caught on scaffolding. Walker then drove forward, and the truck pulled the scaffold out of alignment.
The injured worker was told by the site foreman that he and his co-workers should stop work on the scaffold until it had been inspected and declared safe.
The worker then climbed up the scaffolding to pass on the instructions, but fell two metres to the ground when a scaffold plank gave way.
He sustained injuries to his feet and shoulder.
Supreme Court Master David Harper found Walker had breached his duty to keep a proper lookout and "not to drive so close to obstacles as to come into contact with them where such contact might cause damage".
He also found the CTR Pacific worker had acted negligently.
"It was his function to guide the truck driver into a safe tipping position," he said.
"He guided the truck into a position where it was too close to the scaffolding."
But Master Harper rejected the worker's claim that the principal contractor had been negligent.
"The negligence in that regard is said to have been an omission rather than an act, the omission being the failure to put in place some kind of barrier which would have prevented delivery trucks from getting too close to the scaffolding," he said.
"A barrier was put in place after the event… [but] such an action after the event is not of itself evidence of negligence, or an admission of liability."
Liam Patrick Jones v Ronald Lloyd Walker & Ors [2012] ACTSC 93 (31 May 2012)
