After Four Years, New Zealand Court Finds White Island Owner Guilty of Safety Violation

The ruling concludes a protracted legal process that commenced in the aftermath of the devastating White Island eruption in 2019, which claimed the lives of 22 individuals. Tourists and their guides were on the island when it erupted, leading to a tragic loss of life and numerous injuries.

The verdict, announced by a judge in Auckland, marks the culmination of a lengthy legal battle arising from the catastrophic eruption. In 2020, New Zealand’s workplace regulator, WorkSafe, initiated legal action against multiple organizations and government agencies involved in the events leading up to the disaster, recognizing the need for accountability. White Island, also known by its Maori name, Whakaari, became the epicenter of this legal scrutiny.

Judge Evangelo Thomas, in his ruling, found Whakaari Management, the company responsible for the island, guilty of breaching a safety law designed to protect visitors to active volcanic sites. According to New Zealand’s public broadcaster RNZ, the judge emphasized that the company had failed to conduct essential risk assessments and engage with experts to evaluate and mitigate the dangers associated with allowing tourists to visit the active volcano. He stated, “This was a major failure.”

However, the court dismissed another charge against Whakaari Management, which alleged the company had not adequately minimized the health and safety risks to workers on the island.

The White Island eruption occurred on December 9, 2019, with 47 people, including tour groups and their guides, present on the island. Tragically, nearly half of them lost their lives, including 17 people from Australia.

The legal action by WorkSafe was predicated on the belief that while the eruption may have been unexpected, it was not unforeseeable. The regulator argued that both workers and visitors had a reasonable expectation that the organizations involved would take all necessary measures to ensure their health and safety.

Of the 13 organizations and individuals charged by WorkSafe, six had previously pleaded guilty, leaving Whakaari Management as the final defendant following the trial. Among those who had their charges dismissed were the three brothers who owned Whakaari Management — Andrew, James, and Peter Buttle — all of whom had faced individual charges for failing to fulfill their company’s health and safety obligations.

James Cairney, the lawyer representing the company, contended that Whakaari Management was merely the landowner of the volcano and did not have control over the tours. However, WorkSafe argued that the company held responsibility for the safety of the island as it was effectively their place of business.

Judge Thomas concurred with WorkSafe’s argument, ruling that the company indeed managed and controlled the volcano as a workplace and had failed to sufficiently minimize the risks present.

The impending sentencing of Whakaari Management and the other parties found guilty in February highlights the importance of legal consequences for safety lapses in the management of high-risk tourist attractions. This case serves as a stark reminder that the duty of care and the safety of visitors and workers should always be paramount.

Whakaari Management, along with the six other parties found guilty, will be sentenced in February. They each face potential fines of up to 1.5 million New Zealand dollars, approximately $876,000, underlining the serious legal consequences of safety violations in managing tourist attractions with inherent risks.

Is case’s aftermath may lead to regulatory changes in New Zealand and beyond, as authorities and industry associations review and update safety regulations and guidelines to prevent such tragedies in the future. These changes can help foster a safer environment for both tourists and the local communities surrounding such attractions.

The guilty verdict against the owner of a New Zealand volcano for safety failure underscores the importance of prioritizing safety in natural tourist attractions. The case serves as a stark reminder that the responsibility for safeguarding the well-being of visitors and the environment must always take precedence over profit, and negligence in this regard can have severe legal and societal consequences