Lincoln

Construction firm Lindum Group cleared after investigation into worker’s death

This story is over

A Lincolnshire company charged with breaching health and safety regulations following the death of a skip lorry driver was today cleared after the prosecution offered no evidence against the firm.

Lincoln-based Lindum Group Ltd was originally due to stand trial at Lincoln Crown Court on Tuesday, November 8 accused of two charges which followed a Health and Safety Executive investigation into the death of Anthony Jackson.

The company denied failing to maintain a hook loader and failing to ensure that the same vehicle was thoroughly examined. The charges related to dates between September 2 and October 17, 2013.

But this morning Timothy Green, prosecuting for the HSE, offered no evidence against the company and Judge John Pini QC formally entered not guilty verdicts on both charges.

Judge Pini said: “It is accepted by the prosecution that the company is not responsible for the accident. The company at all times regarded the welfare of their employees as paramount.”

Mr Green said that following the submission of a number of experts reports the prosecution had come to the view that there was no longer sufficient evidence to continue the case and that the company was not responsible for the fatal accident.

The charges arose following an investigation into the death of Mr Jackson, a 66-year-old Lincoln man, following an incident when a skip lorry overturned at Gamston Airfield near Retford on October 17, 2013.

Mark Balysz, for Lindum Group, told the hearing:; “The company welcomes the decision on the part of the prosecution.

“On October 17, 2013 Mr Jackson died as a result of a tragic accident. He was a highly experienced, properly trained and much missed employee.

“The company’s thoughts have been throughout with Anthony and his family. The only concern they have had is in relation to the time it has taken to reach this stage.

“From the start the police were of the same opinion as the defence experts as regards the causation of the accident.

“It is clear that this company was not responsible for the accident. It maintained its vehicles in an exemplary manner. It is a company of good character and its good character is important to it.”