The Supreme Court has dismissed Kevin Carroll’s appeal against a High Court refusal to let him bring judicial review proceedings over the investigation of a fatal accident at Dublin Airport.
In a judgment dated 26 November 2015, Mr Justice John MacMenamin said the accident was an industrial or workplace accident within the remit of the Health & Safety Authority, rather than an air accident or serious incident requiring investigation by the Air Accident Investigation Unit or the Irish Aviation Authority. The Court affirmed the High Court order refusing leave.
David Ralph, a co-employee of Mr Carroll at S.R. Technics, died after a hoist basket fell during de-icing work on 19 March 2008. The aircraft was empty and non-operational, and no passengers or crew were aboard or boarding. A pin holding the basket at the top of the hoist sheared. The judgment noted unanswered questions about the pin and the hoist’s maintenance, but said those issues were not relevant to the application before the Court.
Mr Carroll argued that a similar equipment failure could have endangered passengers if it occurred while they were boarding. He sought an order requiring the Air Accident Investigation Unit to investigate under aviation regulations, and argued that the Irish Aviation Authority had wrongly allowed the Health & Safety Authority to have sole jurisdiction.
The Court considered the application at the leave stage, where the question was whether there was an arguable case for judicial review. Justice MacMenamin said he was prepared to accept that a similar accident might have occurred when passengers had boarded, but that a possible latent threat did not amount to an accident nearly occurring. He concluded the event was not an aviation accident, incident or near miss within the relevant regulations. He also rejected as unstateable Mr Carroll’s argument that the Authority’s approval of S.R. Technics gave rise to a duty to exercise oversight in the circumstances.
The Health & Safety Authority had investigated the incident. The judgment said neither respondent had a mandatory duty to investigate it. Although four years had passed before Mr Carroll sought leave, the Court said delay was not the basis of its decision. It confined its conclusion to the judicial review threshold and did not address the Health & Safety Authority report’s findings.