The scaffolding of a construction project in Taichung collapsed, killing 2 and injuring 2. The architect won the lawsuit against the fine.

A scaffolding collapsed at a construction site in Taichung City's South District last year, killing two and injuring two. (File photo)

A scaffolding collapse occurred at a construction site in Taichung City's South District last year, killing two people and injuring two others. The city's Urban Development Bureau determined that the architect surnamed Huang who was responsible for supervising the construction failed to fulfill his responsibilities for site safety and fined him NT$90,000. Huang refused and filed a lawsuit. The District Court of the Taichung High Administrative Court recently determined that the legal responsibilities of "supervision" and "supervisory work" are different. Huang is a supervisor, and the supervisor should be responsible for construction site safety. The ruling revoked the penalty.

After the accident, the Metropolitan Development Bureau investigated the demolition of the construction frame at the construction site. Since the upper half of the wall connecting rod had been removed, attention should be paid to the stability of the structure, but construction materials were still stacked. It was obvious that there had been negligence in construction and safety protection. Therefore, it fined the contractors, construction supervisors and other related personnel. Among them, Huang Man, who served as the supervising architect, was fined 90,000 yuan.

Huang Nan was dissatisfied and argued that "supervision" and "supervision" should not be confused. The construction factory legally has full-time personnel such as chief technicians and site directors responsible for on-site supervision, including construction technical guidance, construction procedures and construction site safety management. The architect's supervision work mainly confirms whether the project is being constructed in accordance with the approved drawings. The legal responsibilities of the two are not the same.

After hearing the case, the court held that when the Architects Law was revised in 1984, relevant provisions such as "guiding construction methods and inspecting construction safety" for architects were deleted. In principle, labor safety protection and construction methods at the construction site are the legal responsibility of the contractor. The supervising architect mainly checks whether the project is carried out in accordance with the approved drawings, and does not need to have full control of every construction operation on site.

The collapse of the construction frame in this case involved the operation of stacking a large amount of materials after the wall connecting rods were removed. The Metropolitan Development Bureau failed to prove that Huang had discovered specific hazards during his prior inspection but failed to take measures. There was also no evidence that Huang had actual decision-making or control over the method of dismantling the construction frame. The Metropolitan Development Bureau found that the construction safety responsibility of the construction plant was directly placed on the supervising architect. The reason was insufficient, and the judgment was revoked. The fine of 90,000 yuan can still be appealed.