Orr v Hunter Quarries Pty Ltd [2022] NSWCCA 39

Orr v Hunter Quarries Pty Ltd [2022] NSWCCA 39

Questions under s 5AE must be pure questions of law and not mixed questions of law and fact. The Court has discretion to decline to answer questions that are not so, lack utility, or are otherwise not required; the WHS Act does not mandate a particular order for addressing elements of s 32 offences, and reasonable foreseeability is relevant to likelihood but is not determinative in assessment under ss 18 and 19.

Parties
Applicant: Stephen James Orr; Respondent: Hunter Quarries Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Stated Case From District Court Under S 5 AE Criminal Appeal Act 1912 / Determination of Questions of Law Referred Prior to Final Resolution at First Instance
Outcome
Questions answered as proposed; certain questions declined to answer as not arising or not appropriate; advice provided to referring court.
Legal Topics
Stated Case Procedure, Strict Liability Offences, Reasonably Practicable, Reasonable Foreseeability, Health and Safety Duties, Case Stated Jurisdiction, Interpretation of WHS Act
Criminal Law Work Health and Safety Law Stated Case Procedure Strict Liability Offences Reasonably Practicable Reasonable Foreseeability Health and Safety Duties Case Stated Jurisdiction +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 5 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen James Orr

Applicant

Hunter Quarries Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Stated Case From District Court Under S 5 AE Criminal Appeal Act 1912 / Determination of Questions of Law Referred Prior to Final Resolution at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether questions submitted by the primary judge are pure questions of law under s 5AE Criminal Appeal Act 1912
  2. 2 Power of the trial judge to withdraw or submit additional questions under s 5AE
  3. 3 Order and manner of addressing elements of s 32 offence

Ratio Decidendi

Questions under s 5AE must be pure questions of law and not mixed questions of law and fact. The Court has discretion to decline to answer questions that are not so, lack utility, or are otherwise not required; the WHS Act does not mandate a particular order for addressing elements of s 32 offences, and reasonable foreseeability is relevant to likelihood but is not determinative in assessment under ss 18 and 19.

Court Disposition

Questions answered as proposed; certain questions declined to answer as not arising or not appropriate; advice provided to referring court.

Orders

  • Question 1: The Court declines to answer.
  • Question 2: Yes.