SafeWork NSW v Akkari Group Pty Ltd [2022] NSWDC 197

SafeWork NSW v Akkari Group Pty Ltd [2022] NSWDC 197

The defendant, as principal contractor, failed to implement adequate systems and oversight for safe formwork and falsework construction, despite prior advice and foreseeable risk, breaching duties under the WHS Act and Regulations; the objective seriousness was considered high in the mid-range, with the penalty reflecting general and specific deterrence, the utilitarian value of the plea, and the totality principle due to overlapping charges.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Prosecution / Sentence
Outcome
Conviction and fines imposed; orders made for costs and apportionment of fines.
Legal Topics
['work Health and Safety Act Offences' 'construction Industry Safety' 'sentencing' 'general Deterrence' 'mitigating Factors' 'aggravating Factors']
['criminal Law' 'work Health and Safety'] ['work Health and Safety Act Offences' 'construction Industry Safety' 'sentencing' 'general Deterrence' 'mitigating Factors' 'aggravating Factors']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Prosecution / Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendant breached its duties under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (NSW) in relation to safe systems for formwork and falsework construction' "Whether the defendant's conduct warranted conviction and penalty under ss 19(1), 26(2), 38(1), and 32 of the WHS Act" 'Appropriate sentence considering objective seriousness, mitigating/aggravating factors, and totality principle']

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant, as principal contractor, failed to implement adequate systems and oversight for safe formwork and falsework construction, despite prior advice and foreseeable risk, breaching duties under the WHS Act and Regulations; the objective seriousness was considered high in the mid-range, with the penalty reflecting general and specific deterrence, the utilitarian value of the plea, and the totality principle due to overlapping charges.

Court Disposition

Conviction and fines imposed; orders made for costs and apportionment of fines.

Orders

  • ['The defendant is convicted.' 'The appropriate fine for the s 38 offence (Matter No. 2021/117708) is $50,000, reduced by 25% for the utilitarian value of the plea.' 'The defendant is fined $37,500 for the s 38 offence.' 'The appropriate fine for the s 19(1) offence (Matter No. 2021/117757) is $375,000, reduced by...