A landmark New Zealand ruling puts corporate officers on notice over workplace safety obligations
Senior executives across New Zealand are being urged to take a hard look at their own roles following a landmark workplace safety ruling that has redefined what due diligence means at the top of large organisations.
The call follows the New Zealand High Court's dismissal in March of an appeal by Anthony Gibson, former chief executive officer of Ports of Auckland Limited (POAL), who was convicted of failing to exercise due diligence under New Zealand's Health and Safety at Work Act 2015.
It is the first time a senior executive of a large, complex organisation has been convicted under work health and safety laws in either jurisdiction.
In the wake of the ruling, Hall & Wilcox special counsel Nicholas Beech said the decision provides useful guidance on key elements of the due diligence duty owed by officers of large firms.
"Officers should look to conduct a comprehensive and thorough examination of their role and responsibilities within the full context of the structure and operations of the PCBU to reduce the risk of due diligence compliance gaps," Beech said in the insight.
Gibson's workplace safety case
The case arose from the August 2020 death of stevedore Pala'amo Kalati, 31, who was fatally crushed when a shipping container fell from a crane during a night shift.
In the case, the court ruled that an executive's personal liability is assessed not against their overall record, but against specific, identifiable failures.
Gibson had introduced a range of safety initiatives during his tenure at POAL, yet the court found those efforts insufficient.
The former CEO was found to have fallen short in two specific areas: ensuring that exclusion zones around operating cranes were clearly documented and effectively implemented, and verifying that those processes were functioning in practice.
"I accept that the Board has an important role in strategic oversight of resources and processes and that a CEO cannot verify his or her own work, but verification of other operational matters (including monitoring and measuring reports of work as done prepared by subordinates) falls within management's purview," the High Court's decision said.
"At least at a supervisory level, the CEO may be responsible."
The ruling clarified that for senior executives, due diligence is not about operational detail, it is about systems, oversight, and assurance, according to Beech.
The existence of boards, committees, and layered governance structures does not dilute an individual officer's obligations, he added.
According to Beech, where an officer is aware of safety deficiencies, a heightened duty to act is triggered. Partial improvements are not enough. Verification must also reflect work as it is actually performed, not merely what internal reporting systems record.
Gibson was fined NZ$130,000 and ordered to pay NZ$60,000 in costs, both upheld on appeal.
