Inspector Jelley v Dupond Industries Pty Ltd & Ors [2007] NSWIRComm 316

Inspector Jelley v Dupond Industries Pty Ltd & Ors [2007] NSWIRComm 316

The defendants, as employer and officers, failed to ensure the health, safety and welfare of employees as required by s 8(1) of the Occupational Health & Safety Act 2000 by not providing adequate guarding and procedural controls to prevent access to dangerous machinery, resulting in a foreseeable and serious risk that materialised in fatal injury. The failures were not excused by existing partial systems or lack of previous incidents, the risk was avoidable, and penalties reflecting general deterrence are required.

Parties
Prosecutor: Inspector Crispian Jelley; Defendant: Dupond Industries Pty Ltd; Defendant: Graham Craig Dupond; Defendant: Graham Allan Dupond; Defendant: Stephen Norman Dupond
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 December 2007
Procedural Posture
Prosecution / Sentencing and Orders
Outcome
conviction and fines imposed
Legal Topics
Workplace Safety, Sentencing, Machine Guarding, Culpability, General and Specific Deterrence
Occupational Health and Safety Criminal Law Workplace Safety Sentencing Machine Guarding Culpability General and Specific Deterrence

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 6 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Inspector Crispian Jelley

Prosecutor

Dupond Industries Pty Ltd

Defendant

Graham Craig Dupond

Defendant

Graham Allan Dupond

Defendant

Stephen Norman Dupond

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Prosecution / Sentencing and Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants failed to ensure the health, safety and welfare at work of their employees by not adequately guarding dangerous parts of plant
  2. 2 Whether the defendants failed to provide adequate procedures and training for clearing blockages or 'jams' in machinery
  3. 3 Assessment of foreseeability, culpability and seriousness for sentencing under OH&S legislation

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants, as employer and officers, failed to ensure the health, safety and welfare of employees as required by s 8(1) of the Occupational Health & Safety Act 2000 by not providing adequate guarding and procedural controls to prevent access to dangerous machinery, resulting in a foreseeable and serious risk that materialised in fatal injury. The failures were not excused by existing partial systems or lack of previous incidents, the risk was avoidable, and penalties reflecting general deterrence are required.

Court Disposition

conviction and fines imposed

Orders

  • In matter No IRC 9 of 2007: Offence proven, verdict of guilty, conviction, fine of $200,000 with a moiety to prosecutor, costs payable to prosecutor as agreed.
  • In matter No IRC 10 of 2007: Offence proven, guilty, conviction, fine of $25,000 with a moiety to prosecutor.