CONTRIBUTOR
ARTICLE
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

The New South Wales Occupational Health and Safety Legislation requires an owner of a place of work to appoint a principal contractor 'for the construction work' carried out by, or on behalf of, the owner.

But what happens when two separate contractors are employed by the owner to work on the same site simultaneously where neither contractor has possession or control of the entire site?

This commonly occurs on large construction projects with 'green-fields' sites where, for example, both a civil contractor and a building contractor are working simultaneously on the one "site".

The New South Wales Occupational Health and Safety Regulations (Regulations) are silent as to whether more than one principal contractor can be appointed at a place of work.

The Regulations, however, do not prohibit an owner from appointing more than one principal contractor on any one site. In fact, multiple principal contractors appear to be contemplated by the Regulations for the following reasons:

  • the Regulations prescribe the obligation on an owner as an obligation to appoint a principal contractor for work being carried out, not for a site or place of work;
  • the Regulations define "construction work" as three broad (and different) types of work (i.e. excavation, building and civil engineering) and it is possible that a principal contractor will not be responsible for more than one of these types of work on a site; and
  • the Regulations provide that a person cannot be appointed a principal contractor unless that person "is responsible for the construction work at all times".

Principal contractors should understand that the appointment of more than one principal contractor will not alter or diminish their obligations in relation to Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S). The Regulations require that where OH&S responsibilities overlap, these responsibilities are to be discharged in a collaborative and coordinated manner.

Practically, this means that if a principal contractor is required to keep records regarding workers on site, where there are two principal contractors, both are required to keep those records.

Appointing multiple principal contractors in some large projects may be the most sensible approach to ensuring compliance with OH&S requirements for construction work carried out on that project.

Having said that, such an approach may have significant implications for determining who has "operational control" of a "facility" for the purposes of the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Scheme (NGERS) which commences on 1 July 2008.

Please contact us if you require any assistance in determining the extent of your reporting obligations under NGERS or if you require any clarification as to the liabilities that may arise under the new reporting scheme in relation to your business or any current and future projects.

Sydney

   

Robert Riddell

t (02) 9931 4940

e rriddell@nsw.gadens.com.au

Scott Laycock

t (02) 9931 4865

e slaycock@nsw.gadens.com.au

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

AUTHOR(S)
Scott Laycock
Gadens Lawyers
POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Consumer Protection from Australia
BNPL Regulation Takes Another Step Forward
K&L Gates
On 12 March 2024, the Australian Treasury released for consultation an exposure draft legislative package that proposes to amend the current regulatory framework to regulate low cost credit contracts (LCCCs), including Buy Now Pay Later (BNPL) arrangements and other types of credit contracts.
Major changes to The Unfair Contract Terms (UCT) regime
Mellor Olsson Lawyers
Substantial penalties and other changes relating to UCT in standard form contracts with consumers and small businesses.
Can uou believe everything you read from social media influencers? The ACCC is investigating.
Holman Webb
Issues with misleading advertising on social media have raised concerns about possible breaches of the ACL.
International Waters, Local Justice: Australia's High Court Makes Stand Against Unfair Contract Terms (UCT) In The Ruby Princess Case
Bartier Perry
Consumer and business standard form contracts of international entities may be subject to the ACL.
Federal Court reminder on the burden of proof
Gilchrist Connell
The recent Peck decision highlights the importance of meeting the burden of proof in product liability claims.
Australian Businesses: Changes to unfair contract terms laws and new financial penalties come into effect
Spruson & Ferguson
The Australian Consumer Law protects consumers and small businesses from unfair contract terms in standard form contracts.
FREE News Alerts
Sign Up for our free News Alerts - All the latest articles on your chosen topics condensed into a free bi-weekly email.
Upcoming Events
Mondaq Social Media