Closing speeches in the trial over the fatal Haut du Mont explosion are due to begin on Monday, with jurors expected to retire to consider their verdicts towards the end of next week.
All evidence in the case has now been heard, Commissioner Andrew Oldland told the Royal Court yesterday afternoon.
“This completes the evidence in this case. There will be no more,” he told the jury.
Neil Armstrong, 58, John Wright, 60, and Lee Ward, 59, are each charged with 10 counts of gross-negligence manslaughter in connection with the deaths of 10 people in the explosion on 10 December 2022. All three deny the charges.
Jersey Gas, which trades as Island Energy, also denies two alleged breaches of the Health and Safety at Work (Jersey) Law 1989.
The prosecution case concluded on Monday after 24 witnesses gave live evidence in the Royal Court’s temporary courtroom at Jubilee Wharf.
Over the past five weeks, prosecutors have alleged that the three men, who worked together on Island Energy’s network operations team, made a “series of mistakes” while attempting to disconnect the gas supply to Haut du Mont on 9 December 2022.
These allegedly included cutting the wrong pipe, leaving a valve open and failing to carry out a safety test.
The prosecution has also accused Island Energy of “systemic failings” in staff training and supervision, “inconsistent” procedures and a failure to introduce safety controls described as standard practice in the gas industry.
Following the end of the prosecution case, lawyers representing the three individual defendants confirmed that none would give evidence or call witnesses.
However, Advocate Mike Preston, representing Island Energy, called expert witness Chris Clarke, a retired chartered engineer and safety professional with more than 30 years’ experience in the UK energy industry.
Mr Clarke began giving evidence on Tuesday and concluded yesterday.
During his final day in the witness box, Mr Clarke accepted there had been a “lack of clarity” over Island Energy’s safety procedures, but argued that this did not necessarily mean the procedures themselves were unsafe.
Crown Advocate Simon Thomas, prosecuting, questioned him about two sets of procedures introduced in 1997 and 2005.
Mr Clarke said the two sets of procedures were intended to operate alongside one another and “co-exist”.
However, James Cherry, the company’s former head of network operations, had previously told the jury that he believed the earlier procedures had been superseded.
Mr Clarke said he was “surprised” that a senior member of staff had misunderstood how the procedures were intended to work together.
He maintained that the misunderstanding did not create a safety risk because both sets of procedures were safe.
Mr Thomas suggested that the differing interpretations demonstrated a “lack of clarity” within the company.
“Yes, I would agree… having inconsistencies is not advantageous,” Mr Clarke responded. “But whether it impacts health and safety or not is a different question.”
The prosecution also questioned why Island Energy had not prepared a written plan setting out how the work on 9 December 2022 should be carried out safely.
UK safety inspector Martin Wayland had previously told the court that a written plan would “definitely” have identified problems that emerged in the hours before the explosion, including the unexpected loss of gas at St Helier Yacht Club and an open valve at Haut du Mont.
Mr Clarke, however, described the work as “routine” and “not high risk”.
He argued that Island Energy’s existing procedures were adequate and that introducing “another layer of control” would not have made a difference.
For straightforward, low-risk jobs, he said, the company could “rely on competent people”.
The trial will resume on Monday, when Advocate Thomas is due to deliver the prosecution’s closing submission.
Advocates representing the four defendants will then make their closing speeches, before Commissioner Oldland sums up the case for the jury.
Jurors will then retire to consider their verdicts.
