A construction worker killed in an accident on a Bradford building site would not have died if his employers had not breached health and safety laws, a Court heard yesterday.
Skipton-based construction company JN Bentley Ltd used an unsuitable piece of equipment to move bags of cement on a wooden pallet before 23-year-old Steven Allen was killed, it was claimed.
The company has pleaded guilty to failing to ensure the health and safety of its employee, but on a basis which is not acceptable to the prosecution. A three-day trial of issue is taking place for a judge to rule on the basis of plea.
Mr Allen, of Highfield Road, Keighley, was fatally injured on March 9, 2007, while he was working on a construction site in Midland Road, Manningham, Bradford.
Prosecutor Tim Horlock QC told Bradford Crown Court the construction company, which employed 600 people at the time, was building a large recycling centre in Midland Road. Mr Allen was an operative on the site.
The construction workers were using an excavator from a plant hire company, attached to a scissors grab, to move materials around the site.
Mr Horlock said the grab was being used to move a load of cement bags on a wooden pallet when the bags fell off. The pallet remained suspended, but trapped, and Mr Allen attempted to free it. The pallet came free, but the jaws of the machine closed onto his head, causing grievous injuries.
He was taken to hospital but his life support machine was turned off the next day.
Mr Horlock said the grab had not been designed or recommended for use with such loads, and said the use of it was inappropriate.
He claimed the risk assessment, training and provision of information was ineffective.
“Any sensible and competent risk assessment would have highlighted the unsuitability of the equipment,” the prosecutor said.
He added: “The prosecution case is that Steven Allen’s accident and death would not have occurred but for the breach of Section two (of health and safety laws).”
He said the risk assessment had been totally inadequate.
Mr Horlock added: “As a matter of common sense, the use of this item should have alerted any reasonable people to the idea it was not suitable.”
Mark Turner QC, for the company, said it rejected the interpretation it had “ticked the risk box” by pleading guilty.
He said the defence had accepted a general safety deficit, but not that the prosecution had established the necessary risk relating to the matters in dispute.
The trial continues.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article