SafeWork NSW v Haconby Pty Ltd [2018] NSWDC 230

SafeWork NSW v Haconby Pty Ltd [2018] NSWDC 230

Haconby's failures to have and enforce safe work procedures for removing split rim dual wheel assemblies, to stop work when the inside tyre could not be deflated, to train and instruct workers, and to ensure awareness of the Hyster Periodic Maintenance Manual exposed Mr Booth, Mr Mace and Mr Newton to a foreseeable risk of death or serious injury. The failures were mid-range in culpability. After considering the fatality and repeated incident as aggravating factors, the early guilty plea, remorse, cooperation, absence of prior convictions, remedial steps and totality as mitigating factors, the appropriate disposition was conviction and a total fine of $300,000, with costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Prosecution for Offences Under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 / Sentence Following Guilty Pleas
Outcome
The defendant was convicted and fined $300,000.00, and ordered to pay the prosecutor's costs as agreed or assessed.
Legal Topics
['work Health and Safety Duty' 'fatal Workplace Incident' 'risk of Death or Serious Injury' 'split Rim Wheel Assembly' 'objective Seriousness' 'general Deterrence' 'specific Deterrence' 'mitigating Factors' 'aggravating Factors' 'totality Principle' 'prosecution Costs']
['criminal Law' 'work Health and Safety' 'sentencing' 'costs'] ['work Health and Safety Duty' 'fatal Workplace Incident' 'risk of Death or Serious Injury' 'split Rim Wheel Assembly' 'objective Seriousness' 'general Deterrence' 'specific Deterrence' 'mitigating Factors' 'aggravating Factors' 'totality Principle' 'prosecution Costs']

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 for Offences Under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 / Sentence Following Guilty Pleas

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["What penalty should be imposed for Haconby's breaches of ss 19(1), 19(2) and 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011." 'Whether the failures exposed workers and other persons to a risk of death or serious injury.' 'How objective seriousness, aggravating factors, mitigating factors, deterrence, the guilty plea and totality affected sentence.']

Ratio Decidendi

Haconby's failures to have and enforce safe work procedures for removing split rim dual wheel assemblies, to stop work when the inside tyre could not be deflated, to train and instruct workers, and to ensure awareness of the Hyster Periodic Maintenance Manual exposed Mr Booth, Mr Mace and Mr Newton to a foreseeable risk of death or serious injury. The failures were mid-range in culpability. After considering the fatality and repeated incident as aggravating factors, the early guilty plea, remorse, cooperation, absence of prior convictions, remedial steps and totality as mitigating factors, the appropriate disposition was conviction and a total fine of $300,000, with costs.

Court Disposition

The defendant was convicted and fined $300,000.00, and ordered to pay the prosecutor's costs as agreed or assessed.

Orders

  • ['The defendant is convicted.' 'The appropriate fine in matter number 297593/2016 is $300,000 but that will be reduced by 25% to reflect a plea of guilty. The appropriate fine in matter number 297574/2016 is $100,000 but that will be reduced by 25% to reflect a plea of guilty.' 'I impose a fine of $300,000 in...