Inspector Nikolovski v Multi Civil & Rail Services Pty Ltd [2011] NSWIRComm 116

Inspector Nikolovski v Multi Civil & Rail Services Pty Ltd [2011] NSWIRComm 116

The defendant was guilty of breaching s 8(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 because its employees were exposed to a serious risk of being struck or crushed by the float truck ramp when the clevis pin defect had not been repaired and the truck was allowed to be used. Although the breach was serious and the risk was foreseeable, it fell well below the most serious class of offence because the defendant had a considered safety system, the precise risk had not been foreseen, unusual departures from normal procedures contributed to the accident, and significant mitigating factors applied. A fine of $125,000, with half paid to the prosecutor by way of moiety, was appropriate...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Occupational Health and Safety Prosecution for Breach of S 8(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 / Sentencing After Guilty Plea to Amended Application for Order
Outcome
Defendant found guilty and fined $125,000, with half to be paid to the prosecutor by way of moiety; defendant to pay prosecutor's costs.
Legal Topics
['employer Duty of Care' 'defective Plant and Equipment' 'safe Work Method Statements' 'tag Out Systems' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'victim Impact Statement' 'workplace Injury']
['occupational Health and Safety' 'industrial Law' 'criminal Sentencing'] ['employer Duty of Care' 'defective Plant and Equipment' 'safe Work Method Statements' 'tag Out Systems' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'victim Impact Statement' 'workplace 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

Occupational Health and Safety Prosecution for Breach of S 8(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 / Sentencing After Guilty Plea to Amended Application for Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendant breached s 8(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 as particularised in the Amended Application for Order.' "What penalty should be imposed for the defendant's occupational health and safety offence after its guilty plea." 'How the objective seriousness of the breach, foreseeability of risk, prior safety record, remedial steps, contrition, cooperation and victim impact should affect sentence.']

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant was guilty of breaching s 8(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 because its employees were exposed to a serious risk of being struck or crushed by the float truck ramp when the clevis pin defect had not been repaired and the truck was allowed to be used. Although the breach was serious and the risk was foreseeable, it fell well below the most serious class of offence because the defendant had a considered safety system, the precise risk had not been foreseen, unusual departures from normal procedures contributed to the accident, and significant mitigating factors applied. A fine of $125,000, with half paid to the prosecutor by way of moiety, was appropriate...

Court Disposition

Defendant found guilty and fined $125,000, with half to be paid to the prosecutor by way of moiety; defendant to pay prosecutor's costs.

Orders

  • ['The defendant, Multi Civil and Rail Services Pty Ltd, is found guilty of a breach of s 8(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act as particularised in the Amended Application for Order in Matter IRC 1093 of 2010, to which the defendant entered a plea of guilty.' 'The defendant is fined the sum of $125,000 with...