SafeWork NSW v Hydro Clean (Griffith) Pty Ltd [2017] NSWDC 264

SafeWork NSW v Hydro Clean (Griffith) Pty Ltd [2017] NSWDC 264

The offender's culpability was in the mid-range because it was reasonably practicable to eliminate the obvious and foreseeable risk by simple and low-cost measures, including using a suitably licensed rigger or dogman, not permitting Mr Zirilli to perform high risk rigging work without a licence, using tag lines, and maintaining a no go zone. The risk was of death or serious injury, the likelihood of the risk eventuating was quite high, and Mr Zirilli's injuries were a manifestation of that risk. Although the injury and harm were substantial, the offender had no prior convictions, was of good character, showed remorse, cooperated, took remedial steps, had good prospects of rehabilitation...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Prosecution for an Offence Under Ss 19 and 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 / Sentence Following Plea of Guilty
Outcome
The offender was convicted and fined $120,000, with costs ordered in favour of the prosecutor.
Legal Topics
['duty of Person Conducting a Business or Undertaking' 'risk of Death or Serious Injury' 'objective Seriousness' 'general Deterrence' 'specific Deterrence' 'mitigating Factors' 'aggravating Factors' 'plea of Guilty' 'prosecution Costs']
['criminal Law' 'work Health and Safety' 'sentencing' 'costs'] ['duty of Person Conducting a Business or Undertaking' 'risk of Death or Serious Injury' 'objective Seriousness' 'general Deterrence' 'specific Deterrence' 'mitigating Factors' 'aggravating Factors' 'plea of Guilty' '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

Prosecution for an Offence Under Ss 19 and 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 / Sentence Following Plea of Guilty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["What penalty should be imposed for the offender's failure to comply with its health and safety duty, exposing Mr Domenic Zirilli to a risk of death or serious injury." 'How the objective seriousness and culpability of the offender should be assessed having regard to the foreseeable risk, available control measures and the simplicity and cost of avoiding the risk.' "What allowance should be made for the offender's plea of guilty, remorse, cooperation, prior good record, remedial measures and prospects of rehabilitation." 'Whether orders should be made for payment of part of the fine to the prosecutor and for agreed prosecution costs.']

Ratio Decidendi

The offender's culpability was in the mid-range because it was reasonably practicable to eliminate the obvious and foreseeable risk by simple and low-cost measures, including using a suitably licensed rigger or dogman, not permitting Mr Zirilli to perform high risk rigging work without a licence, using tag lines, and maintaining a no go zone. The risk was of death or serious injury, the likelihood of the risk eventuating was quite high, and Mr Zirilli's injuries were a manifestation of that risk. Although the injury and harm were substantial, the offender had no prior convictions, was of good character, showed remorse, cooperated, took remedial steps, had good prospects of rehabilitation...

Court Disposition

The offender was convicted and fined $120,000, with costs ordered in favour of the prosecutor.

Orders

  • ['The offender is convicted.' 'Order the offender to pay a fine of $120,000.' 'Order that 50% of the fine is to be paid to the prosecutor.' "Order the offender to pay the prosecutor's costs agreed at $32,500."]