6th October 2006, 02:22 PM
Uncle Andy
If this had occurred in the UK there would be several prosecutions pending against the University and their staff, and also the landowner.
Although the students may not technically be 'employed' by the University, employment law relating to H & S is usually couched in such a way that it covers non-employees that are at risk from the employer's activities. The University will also have a general 'duty of care' towards all students, and there would be the possibility of bringing a case of 'gross negligence' if it could be shown that the university staff were aware of the hazard but chose to deal with it in an irresponsible manner.
Any removal of asbestos should have been carried out under the Hazardous Waste Regulations 2005.
There would also be a case against the University and the landowner regarding failure to prevent the spread of a pollutant and to notify the correct authorities (Environmental Protection Act II)
Beamo
If this had occurred in the UK there would be several prosecutions pending against the University and their staff, and also the landowner.
Although the students may not technically be 'employed' by the University, employment law relating to H & S is usually couched in such a way that it covers non-employees that are at risk from the employer's activities. The University will also have a general 'duty of care' towards all students, and there would be the possibility of bringing a case of 'gross negligence' if it could be shown that the university staff were aware of the hazard but chose to deal with it in an irresponsible manner.
Any removal of asbestos should have been carried out under the Hazardous Waste Regulations 2005.
There would also be a case against the University and the landowner regarding failure to prevent the spread of a pollutant and to notify the correct authorities (Environmental Protection Act II)
Beamo