ALL evidence in the Haut du Mont explosion trial has now been heard, the Royal Court has been told – with jurors expected to retire to consider their verdicts towards the end of next week.
Commissioner Andrew Oldland confirmed yesterday afternoon that closing speeches are due to begin next week.
“This completes the evidence in this case. There will be no more,” he told the jury.
Neil Armstrong (58), John Wright (60) and Lee Ward (59) are charged with unlawfully killing the ten victims of the explosion on 10 December 2022.
The three men, who worked together on Island Energy’s network operations team, each deny ten counts of gross-negligence manslaughter.
Jersey Gas, which trades as Island Energy, also denies two alleged breaches of the Health and Safety at Work (Jersey) Law 1989.
The prosecution case, which involved 24 witnesses giving live evidence at the Royal Court’s temporary Jubilee Wharf courtroom, concluded on Monday.
Over the past five weeks, the prosecution has alleged that the three workers made a “series of mistakes” while attempting to disconnect the gas supply to Haut du Mont the day before the explosion –including cutting the wrong pipe, leaving a valve open and failing to carry out a safety test.
But it was also argued that the problems went beyond the actions of the three men – accusing Island Energy of “systemic failings” in its training and supervision of staff, “inconsistent” policies and a failure to put in place controls “which are standard in the gas industry”.
Following the conclusion of the prosecution case, lawyers representing the three individual defendants confirmed that their clients would not be giving evidence or calling any other witnesses.
However, Advocate Mike Preston, representing Island Energy, called an expert witness to give evidence on behalf of the company.
Chris Clarke, a retired chartered engineer and safety professional with more than 30 years’ experience in the UK energy industry, began giving evidence on Tuesday.
Following the conclusion of his expert evidence yesterday, Mr Oldland explained the next stages of the trial to jurors.
Crown Advocate Simon Thomas, proseucting, will make his closing submission on Monday, followed by the advocates representing the four defendants.
The Commissioner will then sum up the case before the jury retires to consider its verdicts.
“I think you will be released towards the end of next week,” he told jurors, who were sent home early while legal arguments were heard in their absence.
During his final day of evidence, Mr Clarke accepted that there had been a “lack of clarity” over Island Energy’s safety procedures but argued that this did not necessarily make them unsafe.
Advocate Thomas questioned him about two sets of procedures, introduced in 1997 and 2005, which Mr Clarke said were intended to operate alongside one another and “co-exist”.
However, the company’s former head of network operations, James Cherry, had previously told jurors that he believed the earlier procedures had been superseded.
Mr Clarke said he was “surprised” that a senior member of staff had misunderstood how the procedures were supposed to work together – but maintained that this did not create a risk as both sets of procedures were “safe”.
Mr Thomas suggested that this reflected a “lack of clarity” within the company.
Responding, the expert witness said: “Yes, I would agree…having inconsistencies is not advantageous. But whether it impacts health and safety or not is a different question.”
Jurors were also yesterday shown an Island Energy board paper from March 2022, which recorded a “decline in health and safety performance and culture” over the previous two years.
The document, which had previously been shown to the jury, warned that “compliance has been eroded”, incident rates were “high for a small workforce” and the company’s safety culture had “fallen to a reactive state”.
Mr Thomas questioned whether the company could rely on its workers’ competence given the safety concerns raised in the paper with the board – but Mr Clarke maintained that Mr Wright and Mr Armstrong had both received training and had sufficient experience to carry out the work
During the final day of evidence yesterday, Mr Thomas also questioned why Island Energy had not prepared a written plan setting out how the work should be carried out safely on 9 December 2022.
It came after UK safety inspector Martin Wayland previously told the court that such a written plan would “definitely” have identified the problems that emerged in the hours before the explosion, including the unexpected loss of gas at the St Helier Yacht Club and an open valve at Haut du Mont.
However, Mr Clarke maintained that the work was “routine” and “not high risk” – arguing that the company’s existing procedures were adequate and that “another layer of control” would not have made a difference.
He said that for straightforward, low-risk jobs, the company could “rely on competent people”.
Earlier in his evidence, Mr Clarke had agreed that the failure to carry out a pressure test on pipework supplying Haut du Mont was the “most serious failure” before the explosion.
However, he maintained that the work carried out by the three defendants was “clearly not carried out in conformance with the Island Energy procedures” – which he described as “perfectly adequate”.
The trial resumes on Monday.
