24 March 2015

Judicial review over CTV engineer investigation

The Government has lodged an application before the High Court to seek a judicial review of the decision by the Institute of Professional Engineers of New Zealand (IPENZ) to drop its investigation into Dr Alan Reay’s role in the design of the CTV building, with the documents served to Dr Reay this afternoon.

“The collapse of the CTV building during the 22 February 2011 earthquake resulted in the tragic death of 115 people and rates as one of New Zealand’s worst engineering failures. We owe it to the memory of those who lost their lives to hold those responsible to account for the building’s flawed design, and to ensure every possible lesson is learnt by the engineering profession to minimise the future risk,” Dr Smith says.

“We are taking this judicial review because we believe the decision to drop the investigation into Dr Alan Reay after he resigned from IPENZ was flawed. We want the decision overturned and IPENZ to complete the investigation into the professional conduct of Dr Reay’s role in the design of the CTV building.”

The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment’s Chief Engineer lodged a complaint with IPENZ in 2012, sparking the IPENZ investigation. Dr Reay resigned from IPENZ on 28 February 2014 and consequently IPENZ discontinued the disciplinary processes against him, as IPENZ considered it no longer had jurisdiction to deal with a former member. A subsequent decision by the High Court in September 2014 regarding Mr David Harding, the other engineer involved in the design of the CTV building, ruled that an investigation and disciplinary hearing could continue even when a member resigned.

The proceedings filed in the High Court seek to set aside the decision by IPENZ to dismiss the complaint so that the disciplinary investigation can proceed. This proceeding is separate to the complaint that is currently being heard by IPENZ that Dr Alan Reay failed to disclose his involvement in the CTV building when he sought renewal of his registration as a Chartered Professional Engineer in 2012.

“It is important that we clarify the law as to whether a professional can avoid disciplinary proceedings by simply resigning. Completing the IPENZ investigation will also be important in clarifying the professional standards expected of a senior engineer supervising the work of a more junior engineer,” Dr Smith says.

“The proceedings are complementary and not an alternative to reforms to improve the regulation of professional engineering. We released a discussion paper late last year on proposed changes and, after we have considered submissions, will be progressing with legislative change.”

ends

© Scoop Media