Inspector Stevens v Ford [2011] NSWIRComm 10

Inspector Stevens v Ford [2011] NSWIRComm 10

The applications for order sufficiently identified the nature and essential elements of the offences under the OHS Act, and any deficiencies in particulars could be cured by amendment or provision of further particulars; notices of motion to dismiss were refused and leave granted to amend the applications for order.

Parties
Prosecutor: Inspector Erinn Stevens; First Defendant: Nicholas Worthington Ford; Second Defendant: Stephen Patrick Harrison; Intervenor: Attorney-General for New South Wales; Prosecutor: WorkCover Authority of New South Wales
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Notices of Motion – Occupational Health and Safety – Practice and Procedure / Procedural and Other Rulings on Notices of Motion to Strike Out and for Leave to Amend
Outcome
Notices of motion to dismiss filed by the defendants are dismissed; leave is granted to prosecutor to amend applications for order; costs orders made as specified.
Legal Topics
Notices of Motion, Costs, Amendment of Pleadings, Jurisdiction, Particularisation of Charges, Constitutional Law Issues
Occupational Health and Safety Industrial Law Criminal Procedure Notices of Motion Costs Amendment of Pleadings Jurisdiction Particularisation of Charges +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Inspector Erinn Stevens

Prosecutor

Nicholas Worthington Ford

First Defendant

Stephen Patrick Harrison

Second Defendant

Attorney-General for New South Wales

Intervenor

WorkCover Authority of New South Wales

Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Notices of Motion – Occupational Health and Safety – Practice and Procedure / Procedural and Other Rulings on Notices of Motion to Strike Out and for Leave to Amend

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applications for order were incurably defective for failing to plead essential elements of offences under Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether invalidity of section 26 of the OHS Act arises under Chapter III of the Australian Constitution
  3. 3 Whether deficiency in particulars can be cured by amendment or provision of further particulars

Ratio Decidendi

The applications for order sufficiently identified the nature and essential elements of the offences under the OHS Act, and any deficiencies in particulars could be cured by amendment or provision of further particulars; notices of motion to dismiss were refused and leave granted to amend the applications for order.

Court Disposition

Notices of motion to dismiss filed by the defendants are dismissed; leave is granted to prosecutor to amend applications for order; costs orders made as specified.

Orders

  • In IRC 1252 of 2009: Defendant's notice of motion dismissed; defendant to pay prosecutor's costs of motion to strike out; prosecutor granted leave to amend application for order; prosecutor to pay defendant's costs for motion seeking leave to amend.
  • In IRC 1253 of 2009: Defendant's notice of motion dismissed; defendant to pay prosecutor's costs of motion to strike out; prosecutor granted leave to amend application for order; prosecutor to pay defendant's costs for motion seeking leave to amend.