SafeWork NSW v Tolputt [2017] NSWDC 285

SafeWork NSW v Tolputt [2017] NSWDC 285

The defendant, as a worker, failed to take reasonable care to ensure his acts or omissions did not adversely affect the health and safety of other persons, by implementing an unsafe work method without consultation, leading to a substantial risk of serious injury, and is therefore guilty of breaching s 28(b) as charged. Sentencing considered the gravity of the offence, aggravating and mitigating factors, and resulted in a conviction and a fine reduced by the defendant's plea and circumstances.

Parties
Prosecutor: SafeWork NSW; Defendant: Jeremi Scott Tolputt
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Prosecution / Sentence
Outcome
Conviction; fined $20,000; costs to prosecutor
Legal Topics
Worker's Duty, Risk of Injury, Workplace Safety, Sentencing, Penalty for Breach of Safety Duty
Criminal Law Work Health and Safety Worker's Duty Risk of Injury Workplace Safety Sentencing Penalty for Breach of Safety Duty

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SafeWork NSW

Prosecutor

Jeremi Scott Tolputt

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Prosecution / Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant failed to comply with his duty under s 28(b) of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011
  2. 2 Whether the conduct exposed individuals to risk of death or serious injury
  3. 3 Aggravating and mitigating factors relevant to sentencing

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant, as a worker, failed to take reasonable care to ensure his acts or omissions did not adversely affect the health and safety of other persons, by implementing an unsafe work method without consultation, leading to a substantial risk of serious injury, and is therefore guilty of breaching s 28(b) as charged. Sentencing considered the gravity of the offence, aggravating and mitigating factors, and resulted in a conviction and a fine reduced by the defendant's plea and circumstances.

Court Disposition

Conviction; fined $20,000; costs to prosecutor

Orders

  • The defendant is convicted and fined the sum of $20,000 with a moiety to the prosecutor.
  • The defendant is to pay the prosecutor's costs as may be agreed or assessed.