While matters of the dispute had largely been resolved outside the courtroom, there remained one issue of contention.
The COEU required the polytech to consult with "a suitably qualified and certified machine-safety expert or certified professional engineer with sufficient knowledge and experience ... to design and deliver a detailed safety campaign".
WorkSafe's counsel Trina Williams McIlroy said the man selected to do the job was not certified to the required level.
John Farrow, acting on behalf of Otago Polytechnic, argued the professional in question was an expert in his field and had overseen health and safety across several significant projects.
The certification process — a course lasting several days — would not make him any better qualified to do the job, he said.
Judge Phillips, however, ruled the terms of the undertaking should be followed to the letter.
The court heard the expert could attend the course at the end of the month.
The judge expressed some frustration with both parties that the matter had returned to court.
He suggested WorkSafe — which had opposed the imposition of the COEU — maintained a negative attitude to it "instead of working hand-in-glove to get the result that's to the benefit of students and workers in this immediate vicinity".
"Otago Polytechnic maintains a willingness to collaborate with and take advice from WorkSafe in relation to the enforceable undertaking," Otago Polytechnic chief executive Megan Gibbons said.
"We are committed to delivering the activities required ... and ensuring that no similar, or indeed different, incidents occur in any of our operations in the future."
A student was using a draw saw to cut a length of timber in April 2018 when his fingers slipped in front of the blade, partially amputating his middle finger.
