Nash v Bulga Underground Operations Pty Ltd (re Newstead) [2015] NSWDC 76

Nash v Bulga Underground Operations Pty Ltd (re Newstead) [2015] NSWDC 76

The defendant breached s 8(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 by failing to have in place or implement adequate procedures ensuring employees did not work under unsupported roof during pick changing, resulting in a foreseeably serious risk. Although the defendant had generally robust safety systems, they did not specifically address the hazard in question, warranting a significant penalty.

Parties
Prosecutor: Jennifer Ann Nash, Director, Mine Safety Performance, NSW Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services; Defendant: Bulga Underground Operations Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentence
Outcome
Defendant fined and ordered to pay costs.
Legal Topics
Workplace Safety, Breach of Statutory Duty, Sentencing
Occupational Health and Safety Criminal Law Workplace Safety Breach of Statutory Duty Sentencing

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jennifer Ann Nash, Director, Mine Safety Performance, NSW Department of Trade and Investment, Regional Infrastructure and Services

Prosecutor

Bulga Underground Operations Pty Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant breached s 8(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 by failing to ensure safe systems and practices in changing picks under unsupported roof
  2. 2 Whether the offence should be categorised as arising from failure of safe systems or employee behaviour
  3. 3 Appropriate penalty and allocation of costs

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant breached s 8(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 by failing to have in place or implement adequate procedures ensuring employees did not work under unsupported roof during pick changing, resulting in a foreseeably serious risk. Although the defendant had generally robust safety systems, they did not specifically address the hazard in question, warranting a significant penalty.

Court Disposition

Defendant fined and ordered to pay costs.

Orders

  • Defendant fined $75,000 with a moiety to the Prosecutor.
  • Defendant to pay the Prosecutor's costs agreed or assessed.