Nicholas Prest, 71, and his spouse Anthea, 70, deny being responsible for the dying of a groundsman
A person crushed to dying by a quadbike whereas engaged on Welsh farmland was not given correct coaching by his employer earlier than being ordered to make use of the car, a courtroom has heard.
Nicholas Prest, 71, and his spouse Anthea, 70, deny being responsible for the dying of a groundsman at their luxurious £2.5million mansion with 15 acres of land in Llandogo, Monmouthshire, in 2020. Paul Marsden was discovered lifeless in April by his colleague Mr Miles, who had gone trying to find Mr Marsden after he did not return to the home for his traditional mid-morning espresso break, after which his lunch break.
Within the opening of their trial, prosecutor James Puzey claimed that Mr and Mrs Prest did not do what any employer “would have and will have accomplished” to stop the tragic incident from taking place. This included not offering staff with satisfactory coaching and PPE.
Newport Crown Courtroom heard on October 13 that self-employed Mr Marsden, 47, had been utilizing a quad bike to spray weed killer when he fell from the car on the dwelling belonging to the couple in April, 2020. An inquest beforehand heard he was was discovered lifeless below the “all terrain car” (ATV) by one other employee and a put up mortem examination revealed he had died of asphyxia.
Mr Puzey opened the case by labelling it as one that’s “uncommon however vital” earlier than he defined how by legislation, Mr and Mrs Prest “had a obligation to make sure that the employees on their land have been protected.” He outlined that as per the Well being and Security at Work Act 1974, Mr Marsden was employed by the couple to take care of their farmland, it was their responsibility to make sure all well being and security measures have been taken earlier than any work was carried out. Don’t miss a courtroom report by signing up to our crime e-newsletter right here
The prosecution additionally argued that Mr and Mrs Prest have been equally chargeable for making certain a protected office for Mr Marsden, who had labored for them on Thursdays and Fridays each week since 2013.
It’s the defence’s view that Mr and Mrs Prest, who’re being represented by Keith Morton KC, didn’t have this authorized obligation, as a result of Mr Marsden was a self-employed grounds contractor, working for them privately in a home capability on their 15 acre Pilstone Home, which had nothing to do with their associate enterprise, and due to this fact he was working at his personal threat.
The prosecution argue it’s “apparent” that Mr Marsden was working for the Prest’s agricultural firm on the time of his dying, due to three primary causes. Firstly, as a result of Mr Marsden was engaged on the fields surrounding their home that weren’t owned by them, however as an alternative rented from a neighborhood farmer for the aim of cattle grazing, and different agricultural issues.
It was heard that in 2020, the Prests rented the 42.6 acres of farmland the place Mr Marsden was discovered, for £27,500 per time period, from Mr Charles Hopkinson with one of many tenancy situations stating that it will be used for enterprise functions.
Secondly, as a result of with regard to this land getting used for enterprise, Mr and Mrs Prest obtained widespread agricultural funding funds from the federal government within the sum of £16,651 that yr.
Thirdly, as a result of the land was additionally rented out to a Megan and Lauren White, for his or her horses to graze.
Police and the Well being and Security Government investigated Mr Marsden’s dying initially, earlier than your entire investigation was taken over by HSE, “who concluded that the usage of the quadbike was significantly unsafe, and that no appropriate security precautions have been taken beforehand”.
Notable breaches of well being and security within the prosecution’s view, included sending Mr Marsden out on an ATV that he was not skilled to drive, with out offering PPE, or making certain the tank of herbicide was a protected weight for the terrain when hooked up to the car.
The land Mr Marsden was driving on was described as “comparatively steep, with uneven and tough floor situations.”
Mr and Mrs Prest organised coaching for his or her different grounds staff after Mr Marsden’s dying, the courtroom heard.
To conclude the prosecution’s opening, Mr Puzey reiterated that on the time of his dying, Mr Marsden was working for his or her enterprise, and that each defendants did not adequately minimise their employee’s threat.
He mentioned: “There have been a sequence of things right here that might have elevated the danger of an accident equivalent to this taking place. Mr and Mrs Prest would have and will have accomplished one thing to manage that threat.”
Mr and Mrs Prest deny expenses below the Well being and Security at Work Act. The trial continues.
