SafeWork NSW v Pegela Rural Enterprises Pty Ltd [2016] NSWDC 142

SafeWork NSW v Pegela Rural Enterprises Pty Ltd [2016] NSWDC 142

Pegela Rural Enterprises Pty Ltd breached its duty under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 by failing to ensure appropriate systems and training for safe attachment of the hoe to the skid steer. This omission, although occurring in the context of an experienced worker, resulted in foreseeable risk and actual...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Prosecutor: SafeWork NSW; Defendant: Pegela Rural Enterprises Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentence
Outcome
Conviction and fine imposed
Legal Topics
Employer Duty, Workplace Fatality, Risk Foreseeability, Training Requirements, Sentencing
Work Health and Safety Criminal Law Employer Duty Workplace Fatality Risk Foreseeability Training Requirements Sentencing

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SafeWork NSW

Prosecutor

Pegela Rural Enterprises Pty Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Pegela Rural Enterprises Pty Ltd breached its duty under s 19(1) of the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 resulting in the death of a worker and if so, what penalty is appropriate.

Ratio Decidendi

Pegela Rural Enterprises Pty Ltd breached its duty under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 by failing to ensure appropriate systems and training for safe attachment of the hoe to the skid steer. This omission, although occurring in the context of an experienced worker, resulted in foreseeable risk and actual fatality, justifying conviction and penalty, but culpability was at a relatively low level.

Court Disposition

Conviction and fine imposed

Orders

  • The defendant is convicted and fined the sum of $90,000 with a moiety to the prosecutor.
  • The defendant is to pay the prosecutor's costs in the sum of $29,700.