Criminal trials being costly undertakings, public prosecutors never don their gowns and head to court without reasonably strong prospects of securing a conviction. Kay, Catanzariti, whose son, Ben, tragically died on a Kingston construction site in 2012, undoubtedly knew this to be the case – which partly explains her distress at the collapse of the case against two parties charged with being legally accountable for his death.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The case, brought by ACT Director of Public Prosecutions in 2014, marked the most serious of its type to come before a court under newly nationally harmonised occupations safety laws. It also offered the prospect of some kind of closure for Ms Catanzariti, understandably still distraught at the loss of her son. There was, in other words, a lot riding on the outcome of the case against Schwing Australia and Phillip James O'Rourke, an engineer.
The DPP alleged that the collapse of the concrete pump boom which killed Mr Catanzariti and injured two of his workmates was caused by the failure of bolts holding a slew ring bearing in place, and that the bolts' failure was due to incorrect or uneven tensioning during a service carried out by Schwing Australia and Mr O'Rourke. The allegation was based on an expert opinion obtained during investigation of the incident.
Just before the case was listed for hearing on August 31 2015, however, the defence advised the court it would tender its own expert report alleging the bolts had failed because of hydrogen embrittlement (a fault introduced during the manufacturing process), not incorrect tightening.
An adjournment was called so that Worksafe ACT, on behalf of the DPP, could engage another metallurgical expert. His subsequent report found that stress corrosion cracking caused the bolts' failure. In the light of three conflicting expert reports, and the requirement that the prosecution prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, the DPP decided to discontinue the matter.
Accidents on construction sites involving concrete pumps (fatal or otherwise) are not unusual. But construction workers are far more likely to be injured or killed by a boom coming into contact with overhead wires, or by hose whip (a phenomenon caused by air being trapped in the delivery system) than they are by a collapsing boom.
That suggests both the engineering and maintenance of the equipment used in the concrete pumping and placement industry is sound. However, the loads and stresses involved in pumping large quantities of concrete over distances of up to 50 metres or more and at pressures as high as 85 bar are significant, and it may be that more frequent and thorough testing of components is warranted.
The resumption of the coroner's inquest into Mr Catanzariti's death, with its ability to to delve into issues like this without the need to abide by the normal rules of evidence, may result in recommendations that lead to safer construction sites. It's also to be hoped that it leads to a restoration of Mrs Catanzariti's shattered faith in the the legal process.
