SafeWork NSW v Stitt [2024] NSWDC 255

SafeWork NSW v Stitt [2024] NSWDC 255

The defendant was conducting a business or undertaking and owed Mr Connell a health and safety duty. He failed to take reasonably practicable steps to comply with that duty, including engaging a licensed scaffolder or not directing unlicensed workers to perform scaffolding work, devising and enforcing an adequate system of work, and adequately supervising the workers. The scaffold was erected to a height from which a person or object could fall more than 4m, the ledgers were incorrectly installed, and Mr Connell was required to dismantle it without a high risk work licence. Those failures were each a significant or substantial cause of Mr Connell being exposed to a risk of death or...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Prosecution for a Category 2 Work Health and Safety Offence Under S 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 / Contested Hearing After Plea of Not Guilty; Verdict on Guilt, Sentence to Be Listed
Outcome
The defendant was found guilty of the s 32 offence and the matter will be listed for sentence on a date convenient to the parties.
Legal Topics
['health and Safety Duty of a Person Conducting a Business or Undertaking' 'scaffolding Work' 'high Risk Work Licence' 'falls From Height' 'safe Work Method Statements' 'reasonably Practicable Control Measures' 'causation of Exposure to Risk of Death or Serious Injury']
['criminal Law' 'work Health and Safety' 'employment and Workplace Safety'] ['health and Safety Duty of a Person Conducting a Business or Undertaking' 'scaffolding Work' 'high Risk Work Licence' 'falls From Height' 'safe Work Method Statements' 'reasonably Practicable Control Measures' 'causation of Exposure to Risk of Death or Serious Injury']

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 a Category 2 Work Health and Safety Offence Under S 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 / Contested Hearing After Plea of Not Guilty; Verdict on Guilt, Sentence to Be Listed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendant failed to comply with his health and safety duty by failing to take reasonably practicable steps particularised in the Summons.' "Whether the defendant's breach of duty exposed Todd Connell to a risk of death or serious injury." 'Whether it was reasonably practicable to engage a person with a high risk work licence in basic scaffolding or not direct unlicensed workers to carry out the scaffolding work.' 'Whether the defendant devised, implemented and enforced an adequate system of work, required inspection by a competent person, and provided adequate supervision.']

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant was conducting a business or undertaking and owed Mr Connell a health and safety duty. He failed to take reasonably practicable steps to comply with that duty, including engaging a licensed scaffolder or not directing unlicensed workers to perform scaffolding work, devising and enforcing an adequate system of work, and adequately supervising the workers. The scaffold was erected to a height from which a person or object could fall more than 4m, the ledgers were incorrectly installed, and Mr Connell was required to dismantle it without a high risk work licence. Those failures were each a significant or substantial cause of Mr Connell being exposed to a risk of death or...

Court Disposition

The defendant was found guilty of the s 32 offence and the matter will be listed for sentence on a date convenient to the parties.

Orders

  • ['I find the defendant guilty of the s 32 offence.' 'The matter will be listed for sentence on a date convenient to the parties.']