POINT OF LAW - FALL AND DEATH OF A WORKER
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Check Vanity Plate Availability Ontario
| Yard Temporary and Mobile |  | Employer  | Worker  |
| After you hang up a pavement, the colleague Fa.Fa. hoisted to the top of the scaffolding, but during the climb, now almost at your destination, probably as a result of a collision with the structure of the scaffolding, the floor is released and dropped from a height of about 12-13 meters struck F. head, who was at the perpendicular, which reported serious injuries, which result in death.
then notes that, as evident from the statements of the witness S. and photographing, the hook of the rope was stuck to a simple projection of the table, but it was not formed by a closed loop that would prevent spillage. The point of attachment instead had an opening, because the oscillation of the load, did not prevent the hook of the rope to go out, leading to the fall of the heavy load, which struck F., causing death. The sentence appeal correctly highlights the point that the responsibility of the accused with reference to the incident was clear, whether it be considered that the table in the terminal phase of lifting the scaffolding had hit, and that there was was excessive "Tirotto" will go toward the rope pulley colleague who worked from below with the cooperation of the victim, as such events were not unforeseen, but should be treated and prevented by T, therefore, able to cause dangerous decoupling of the heavy load, not insured properly. then consider the Territorial Court with logical and appropriate reasons that could not be relieved of liability on employers who used such a risky system load, the simple oral prescription given to workers not to stop in loading zones, because, in this context could not be concluded that the presence of workers in these areas could be considered an exceptional event, such as to break the causal link. " ITALIAN REPUBLIC ITALIAN PEOPLE IN THE NAME OF THE COURT SUPREME de cassation SECTION FOUR CRIMINAL Composed by Ill.mi Sigg.ri Magistrates: MORGIGNI Dr. Antonio - President FOTI Dr. James - Director MAISANO Dr. Julius - Director Dr. MARINELLI Felicetta - rel. Councillor Dr gives the following: Blaiotta Marco Rocco - Director 1) TD, N. THE ***; against sentence no COURT APPEAL 1514/2007 of Bologna, 13/11/2009; heard in open court of 08/10/2010 the report made by Councilor Dr. FELICETTI MARINELLI; heard the attorney General in the person of Dr. Oscar Cedrangolo, which found the appeal inadmissible; the acts, the sentence and the appeal; heard the defender lawyer. Guido Orlando Forum in Rome asking for the appeal is accepted. TD was taken for trial before the Court of Ravenna to meet the offender under Article. Cp 589, paragraph 2 because, as the legal representative of the construction firm T. scaffolding, to blame, not observing the rules on the prevention of occupational accidents mentioned in the charge, causes the death of FM, an official from the company above and in particular the employee was in the construction site at the technical institute Industrial State "*** to make the construction of scaffolding at the front of the building and proceeded to hoist the metal free floor using a pulley and a rope with a hook for them to get to the top of the scaffolding where colleagues dropped them and mount them. Legislative Decree no. 626 of 1994, Art. 35, paragraph 4 ter, lett. After you hang up a pavement, the colleague Fa.Fa. hoisted to the top of the scaffolding, but during the climb, now almost at your destination, probably as a result of a collision with the structure of the scaffolding, the floor is released and dropped from a height of about 12-13 meters F. struck in the head, which was located at the perpendicular, which reported serious injuries, which result in death. It was also alleged breach of to) as the method and equipment used to lift, pulley by hand, the floor of the scaffolding, were not likely to prevent the fall of the load, taking into account the load to be handled, gripping and coupling device, the DPR 547 of 1955, Art. 186 because, during the assembly of scaffolding, rigging for lifting the walking surfaces were not arranged so as to prevent the passage of suspended load at the worker, the Legislative Decree no. 626 1994, art. 4, paragraph 5, letter. f) because the employer had not requested the observance of safety rules by employees, particularly the use of DPI (use of hard hat head - Presidential Decree No. 547 of 1955, Art . 38), of Legislative Decree no. 626 of 1994, Art. 22 because the employer had not ensured that each employee receives adequate training on safety and health. With 1 .12.06 ruling in the Court of Ravenna single judge had declared TD responsible for the offenses listed above and was sentenced to one year imprisonment (otherwise condoned) in addition to payment of court costs and compensation for damages to civil parties formed. against the decision of the Court of Ravenna counsel for the defendant appealed. The Court of Appeal of Bologna, with the subject of this appeal the ruling issued on 13.11.2009, upheld the ruling by the court of first instance and ordered the appellant to pay the costs. against the ruling of the Court of Appeal in Bologna TD appealed to the Supreme Court, and contends that the cancellation or postponement without. public hearing on 8 / 10 / 2010 the appeal was decided by the fulfillment of the obligations imposed the code of ritual. violation of Article. Cpp 606, paragraph 1, lett. b) incorrect application of criminal law in respect of Article. 40 cp. According to the applicant the results of the investigation do not support the conclusions they reached the judges of the Court of Appeal of Bologna, who felt that the coupling system of platforms used in the construction site where is the tragic accident was not sure, that compliance with the rules of prevention would have led to the adoption of other means of lifting platforms and, in conclusion, the adoption of different modes of lifting certainly would lead to greater security, which, finally, to prevent the F. stop in the loading area would be necessary to provide a suitable boundary. would not have been adequately evaluated nor the statements by the heads S. he said that the hook was used with safe. Nor were considered shared the conclusions were reached the appellate courts with reference to the violation of Presidential Decree No. 547 of 1955, Art. 186, since it was created a special pass that allowed you to do the necessary positioning of the scaffolding without passing through the area in which it was made on lifting platforms. According to the applicant, therefore, on the basis of evidence gathered during the process, Switzerland was not satisfied with the level of certainty required by art. Cp 40, paragraph 2, the causal link between the alleged omissions and the death of the worker FM. The proposed grounds of appeal are clearly unfounded, as reproduce issues on which the judgment gave ample and convincing answer, and aim at a different reconstruction of fact precluded the court's legitimacy. Given the above it is noted that the appeal for lack obvious contradictions and illogical reasoning select a path that is exempt from the identification of the heads or points of the decision referred to in the appeal and also is exempt from the specific indication elements of law that support each claim. The complaints that they invest the contradictory or the apparent illogicality of the grounds require an analysis of the censored text in order to highlight the presence of notified defects. Conversely, the complaint denouncing the lack of motivation to bring out what is missing and that excludes the function of supporting the achievement of its decision. A complaint denouncing the lack of motivation that must provide specific statement of the issues previously raised, specific comparison between questions asked and answers given, specific and detailed measurement of the grounds for appeal as a highlight, despite the apparent existence of a completed argue, has come back to determine the total lack of a speech justifying the decision and must provide careful identification of specific gaps that have resulted in the total absence. This is not found in the application of TD, as it lacks any consideration for motivation criticized, and far from the identification of specific gaps or flaws which would answer the overall lack of motivation, complains of the result drawn from the contested decision accumulates the fact that I intend to redesign a key charged "against him in order to thus obtain a decision just taken by the replacement of the trial court. appealed the ruling is unclear the path of motivation which led the judges to confirm the decision at first instance. The Court of Appeal in fact, with reference to the existence of a causal link between the conduct of the accused be placed in TD and the occupational accident causing the death of FM, which carefully evaluates the emergency investigation must conclude that The most serious incident must be attributed to a tragic fatality or serious negligence, however, a charge the worker. notes therefore that, as evident from the statements of the witness S. and photographing, the hook of the rope was stuck to a simple projection of the table, but was not formed by a closed loop that would prevent its release. The attachment point was instead an opening, because the oscillation of the load, did not prevent the hook of the rope to get out, causing the fall of the heavy load, which struck F., causing death. The ruling highlights the contested correctly on the point that the responsibility of the accused with the incident reference was clear, whether it be considered that the table in the terminal phase of lifting the scaffolding had hit, whether there had been excessive "Tirotto "it will go of the rope to the pulley from the bottom of my colleague who worked with the cooperation of the victim, as such events were not unexpected, but should be treated and prevented by T, because capable of causing the release of dangerous heavy load, not insured properly. then consider the Territorial Court with logical and appropriate reasons that could not be relieved of liability on employers who used such a risky system load, the simple oral prescription given to workers not to stop in loading zones, as in this context, could not be concluded that the presence of workers in these areas could be considered an exceptional event, such as to break the causal link. Therefore neither respect nor respect for the leaders in the paragraphs appeal, nor from the entire weaving motivational in its synthesis is consistent and complete, has been configured in any way without protest, contradiction or obvious illogic of motivation. PQM Last updated Saturday, November 13, 2010 11:11 
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
|
0 comments:
Post a Comment