Judgment no. 15474 of 2024: Responsibility in Construction Site Safety

The recent ordinance no. 15474, issued by the Court of Cassation on June 3, 2024, offers relevant insights into construction site safety and responsibility in preventing workplace accidents. In particular, the judgment addresses the roles of the Safety Coordinator during the Design phase (CSP) and during the Execution phase (CSE), highlighting how both must fulfil specific obligations to ensure the safety of workers.

Context of the Judgment

In the case at hand, the relatives of a truck driver who died on a construction site filed a claim for damages, arguing that responsibility should also fall on the Safety Coordinator during the Design phase. The Court of Cassation, with its ordinance, quashed the dismissal judgment of the Court of Appeal of Bologna, clarifying that the obligation to draw up an adequate Safety and Coordination Plan (PSC) rests not only with the CSE but also with the CSP.

Workplace accidents - Prevention - Interference between works of different contracting companies - Safety Coordinator during the design phase - Obligations - Drawing up of the Safety and Coordination Plan (PSC) - Minimum content - Case law. In terms of preventing workplace accidents, the obligation to equip the Safety and Coordination Plan (PSC) with the minimum requirements regarding the analysis of risks connected to the construction site area and its organisation, arising from the interference between the different works carried out and the operational provisions for cooperation between the companies involved in the same works, falls not only on the Safety Coordinator during the execution phase (CSE) but also on the Safety Coordinator during the design phase (CSP). (In this case, the Supreme Court quashed with referral the judgment dismissing the claim for damages brought, among others, against the safety coordinator during the design phase, by the relatives of a truck driver who died on the construction site following a fatal accident that occurred during unloading operations, based on the erroneous finding that the obligation rested exclusively on the safety manager during the execution phase).

Implications of the Judgment

This judgment has significant implications for the construction sector and for all companies operating on construction sites. The CSP's responsibility therefore extends beyond mere design, requiring a thorough analysis of interference between different works and the definition of an effective Safety Plan. It is important for companies to understand the need for cooperation among the various actors involved, including subcontractors, to ensure a safe working environment.

Conclusions

In conclusion, ordinance no. 15474 of 2024 clarifies that responsibility for construction site safety is shared between the CSP and the CSE, promoting an integrated approach to workplace safety. It is essential that all parties involved in the execution of a construction project strictly adhere to the regulatory obligations, in order to prevent tragic events like the one that led to the present case. Greater attention to safety not only protects workers but also ensures the long-term sustainability of businesses.