Company showed 'gross disregard for principles of safety', says judge

Smurfit News Press Ltd had shown "gross disregard for the principles of safety", Circuit Court Judge Raymond Groarke said yesterday…

Smurfit News Press Ltd had shown "gross disregard for the principles of safety", Circuit Court Judge Raymond Groarke said yesterday.

He fined the company €1 million for breaching health and safety regulations at Kells Industrial Estate, Co Meath, in 2002.

Smurfit News Press Ltd pleaded guilty at Trim Circuit Court to breaches of the health and safety regulations in April and May 2002.

The court heard that on the night of April 18th, 2002, Mr Stephen Farrell was working as production planner on the printing press at Kells Industrial Estate.

READ MORE

The company does not own the premises or the printing press, the court heard, but has operated a labour and maintenance agreement with the owners, News International Ltd, part of the Rupert Murdoch network since 2001.

Mr Farrell lifted his right leg to pull up his sock. On putting his leg down the limb was pulled into the path of the roller. His foot became caught in the roller. He had to have his leg amputated from below the knee.

Evidence was given that on May 6th, 2002, Mr Chris Coyle, who was working on a different printing machine, was clearing out a paper break. His left hand was pulled in between two rollers. The fire brigade was called to release him and he was taken to hospital in Navan. Later he had to have skin grafts.

Ms Alice Doherty, a Health and Safety Authority officer, said she had visited the company in March 2002. She had not seen the presses in operation as they only ran at night. The court heard that both accidents were reported to the HSA.

A witness gave evidence that all employees were summoned to a meeting after the first accident and warned about the rollers. However, Mr Coyle was not at the meeting as he was on leave. He heard about the accident to Mr Farrell and knew employees had to be careful around printing presses.

The HSA officer told the court that the second accident was "almost identical" to the first. A web break had occurred and the rollers continued to spin. In September 2002 interlocking guards were placed on the machinery to stop anyone from gaining access to the rollers until five minutes after a web break occurred. She asked the company to simulate a web break and it transpired that it would take up to 10 minutes before the rollers would stop.

She said the company had a safety statement but it had not identified this particular risk. She told Judge Groarke that it should have been identified from the outset.

The company should have looked at the distance between the rollers and considered the possibility of entrapment.

Mr Paul Burns SC, for the company, submitted that even the manufacturers apparently had not identified this risk.

The court heard that the machinery was 12-18 years old and had been purchased second hand. The maker was PBA, one of the top two manufacturers of printing presses in the world.

The chief executive of Smurfit News Press Ltd, Mr Tom Mooney, told the court that the company employed a full-time health and safety officer who had drawn up the safety statement. But nobody had identified this particular risk.

Mr Mooney expressed the company's deep regret that two employees had been injured. All their medical expenses had been met and the company had ensured that the necessary rehabilitation was afforded to them. Both had returned to work at the plant and one of them, Mr Farrell, had since been promoted. Both men had made claims for compensation which would be met. The company was fully insured.

Judge Groarke noted that at the time of the first accident safety guards were not in place. Then, about three weeks later, Mr Coyle, got his arm caught and sustained serious injury. That should never have happened said Judge Groarke, who added that the company had had a "cavalier regard" for the concept of safety.

He fined the company €150,000 on each of three counts of breaching the health and safety regulations on the night of the first accident.

Judge Groarke said he wanted the fines for the breaches of the regulations on the date of the second accident to reflect his view that the time for serious and immediate steps to have been taken was after the first accident. He accordingly fined the company €250,000 on each of three counts of breaching the health and safety regulations in May 2002.

In recognition of the guilty pleas, Judge Groarke reduced the overall €1.2 million fine to €1 million.