Sacco Builders Pty Ltd v Inspector Chaston [2009] NSWIRComm 153

Sacco Builders Pty Ltd v Inspector Chaston [2009] NSWIRComm 153

The Full Bench held that the trial judge correctly assessed the offences as objectively very serious, given the obvious and foreseeable risk of serious injury or death to an untrained and unsupervised worker operating a boom lift at height. The trial judge did not err in comparing the culpability of the appellants or in applying the principle of parity; both had direct involvement and non-delegable statutory obligations to ensure safety. The penalties imposed ($180,000 per appellant, representing a substantial discount for early guilty pleas) were within the acceptable range, considering the $550,000 statutory maximum and the aggravating features.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 September 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Sentence / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
['breach of S 8(2) Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 (nsw)' 'appeal Against Sentence' 'objective Seriousness' 'principle of Parity' 'culpability and Mitigation' 'sentencing Methodology']
['occupational Health and Safety' 'criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['breach of S 8(2) Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 (nsw)' 'appeal Against Sentence' 'objective Seriousness' 'principle of Parity' 'culpability and Mitigation' 'sentencing Methodology']

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

Appeal Against Sentence / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentences imposed for breach of s 8(2) Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 (NSW) were manifestly excessive' 'Whether the trial judge erred in the assessment of the objective seriousness of the offences' 'Whether the principle of parity was applied correctly' 'Whether insufficient weight was given to circumstances of mitigation' 'Whether fresh evidence regarding causation should be admitted']

Ratio Decidendi

The Full Bench held that the trial judge correctly assessed the offences as objectively very serious, given the obvious and foreseeable risk of serious injury or death to an untrained and unsupervised worker operating a boom lift at height. The trial judge did not err in comparing the culpability of the appellants or in applying the principle of parity; both had direct involvement and non-delegable statutory obligations to ensure safety. The penalties imposed ($180,000 per appellant, representing a substantial discount for early guilty pleas) were within the acceptable range, considering the $550,000 statutory maximum and the aggravating features.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • ['1. The appeals are dismissed.' "2. The appellants are to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal, as agreed or assessed. Failing agreement, the matter may be referred to the Registrar for assessment."]