An engineer and his company carried out construction work on a dam spillway without building consent, Judge Stephen O'Driscoll has found.
Engineer David John Hamilton and his engineering consultancy firm, David Hamilton and Associates Ltd, denied the charge and a defended hearing was held over two days in the Alexandra District Court, starting on June 30.
In his reserved decision on the case, which was released only yesterday, Judge O'Driscoll said a dam spillway was constructed on Satinburn Ltd's farm near Muddy Creek Rd, Omakau, between April 12 and 20, without building consent.
The Otago Regional Council became aware of the construction and responded by starting a prosecution under the Building Act.
Judge O'Driscoll found the charges brought against Hamilton and his company were proved beyond reasonable doubt.
"I think the defendants, from a practical point of view, found themselves in a difficult position.
"They were not originally engaged in the design or building work of the dam. By the time they were engaged, the dam had been built.
"It was obvious to all parties that before a certificate of acceptance would be granted by the ORC, a properly constructed spillway had to be built."
Satinburn had engaged Roger Wilson Contracting Ltd to repair the wall of an irrigation dam in May 2008. The contractor found the dam could not be safely repaired.
The original dam was removed and a new dam constructed downstream, Judge O'Driscoll said. No resource consent or building consent was applied for or granted for the work.
On February 12, 2010, Satinburn applied under the Building Act for a certificate of acceptance for the new dam, but the application was rejected because the regional council was not satisfied the work met the requirements of the building code.
Five days later, the council issued a Notice to Fix, which required the dam's removal and the reinstatement of the site or a report from an engineer to satisfy the council the new dam complied with the building Act and regulations.
The notice stated all building work had to stop until the council was satisfied Satinburn would comply.
Satinburn employed Petherick Consultancy to prepare a report, and David Hamilton and Associates was then employed to review the report.
"The defendants' report identified that the dam overflow pipe was inadequate and that an overflow spillway needed to be incorporated into the dam, in accordance with the plans in the Petherick report," JudgeO'Driscoll said.
Satinburn then employed Hamilton and his company to obtain a certificate of acceptance for the new dam and the defendants had to co-ordinate all investigations.
A certificate of acceptance was applied for but was not granted.
The council said that the defendants had carried out building work without having a building consent for that same work.
Counsel for Hamilton and David Hamilton and Associates, Phil Page, told the court during the defended hearing neither Hamilton nor his company carried out "building work".
If it was deemed to be building work, then a consent could not be obtained as the work had to be carried out urgently to make the dam safe.
The work was authorised by the Notice to Fix and was no more than design work unconnected to building work, Mr Page said.
Two other companies faced similar charges relating to the same dam spillway.
Satinburn Ltd, of Christchurch, admitted the charge and a further one of failing to comply with a notice issued by the council requiring all work to stop.
Roger Wilson Contracting Ltd, of Alexandra, also admitted a charge of building the spillway without consent.
No date has been set yet for the sentencing of all defendants involved in the case.
