SafeWork NSW v Bennett [2022] NSWDC 332
Mr Bennett, as a person conducting a business or undertaking, failed to take reasonably practicable steps required by the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (NSW) to eliminate or minimise foreseeable risks posed by crane operations near overhead power lines, including not forbidding unqualified operation, not ensuring site induction, not conducting a proper risk assessment, and not providing qualified supervision or a spotter, which constituted breaches of duty exposing individuals to a risk of death or serious injury, and these breaches were proven beyond reasonable doubt to be significant and substantial contributors to that risk.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 12 August 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Verdict on Liability (orders Made, Sentencing Hearing Pending)
- Outcome
- Guilty verdicts on both summonses (s 19(1), s 19(2))
- Legal Topics
- ['duty of Persons Undertaking Business' 'risk of Death or Serious Injury' 'elements of Offence' 'reasonable Practicability' 'causation in WHS Offences']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Verdict on Liability (orders Made, Sentencing Hearing Pending)
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the defendant owed a health and safety duty under s 19(1) or s 19(2) of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (NSW)' 'Whether the defendant failed to comply with that duty' 'Whether that failure exposed workers or other persons to a risk of death or serious injury' 'What measures were reasonably practicable in the circumstances']
Ratio Decidendi
Mr Bennett, as a person conducting a business or undertaking, failed to take reasonably practicable steps required by the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (NSW) to eliminate or minimise foreseeable risks posed by crane operations near overhead power lines, including not forbidding unqualified operation, not ensuring site induction, not conducting a proper risk assessment, and not providing qualified supervision or a spotter, which constituted breaches of duty exposing individuals to a risk of death or serious injury, and these breaches were proven beyond reasonable doubt to be significant and substantial contributors to that risk.
Court Disposition
Guilty verdicts on both summonses (s 19(1), s 19(2))
Orders
- ['The elements set out in the Summons dated 22 October 2020 have been proved beyond reasonable doubt.' 'The defendant Mr Nigel Bennett is found guilty.' 'The matters will be listed for a sentence hearing on a date convenient to the parties.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment