Morrison v Perilya Broken Hill Ltd [2010] NSWIRComm 66

Morrison v Perilya Broken Hill Ltd [2010] NSWIRComm 66

The defendant's failure to provide reasonably practicable engineering controls, particularly laser technology, exposed employees using line of sight remote controlled loaders to the risk of being struck or crushed, and caused Mr Symonds' safety to be placed at risk resulting in his death. The breach was objectively serious but not in the highest range because of the defendant's extensive safety systems, audits, risk assessments, absence of a specific requirement for lasers in standards or guidelines, and steps already being taken toward tele-remote operations. Taking account of deterrence, first offender status, co-operation, contrition and a 20 per cent guilty plea discount, a fine of...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Prosecution Under S 8(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 / Sentencing After Plea of Guilty
Outcome
Defendant found guilty of a breach of s 8(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 and fined $130,000.
Legal Topics
['fatal Workplace Accident' 'remote Controlled Mining Equipment' 'employer Duty to Ensure Health, Safety and Welfare of Employees' 'engineering Controls' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'general and Specific Deterrence']
['occupational Health and Safety' 'criminal Sentencing' 'mining Safety'] ['fatal Workplace Accident' 'remote Controlled Mining Equipment' 'employer Duty to Ensure Health, Safety and Welfare of Employees' 'engineering Controls' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'general and Specific Deterrence']

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

Prosecution Under S 8(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 / Sentencing After Plea of Guilty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendant breached s 8(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 by failing to provide appropriate engineering controls to prevent workers from moving up to, alongside or past remote controlled loaders while they were operating or able to be operated.' 'The objective seriousness of the offence and the appropriate penalty.' "The extent of any discount for the defendant's guilty plea." 'The relevance of general deterrence, specific deterrence, first offender status, co-operation and contrition.']

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant's failure to provide reasonably practicable engineering controls, particularly laser technology, exposed employees using line of sight remote controlled loaders to the risk of being struck or crushed, and caused Mr Symonds' safety to be placed at risk resulting in his death. The breach was objectively serious but not in the highest range because of the defendant's extensive safety systems, audits, risk assessments, absence of a specific requirement for lasers in standards or guidelines, and steps already being taken toward tele-remote operations. Taking account of deterrence, first offender status, co-operation, contrition and a 20 per cent guilty plea discount, a fine of...

Court Disposition

Defendant found guilty of a breach of s 8(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 and fined $130,000.

Orders

  • ['The defendant is found guilty of a breach of s 8(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 as ultimately particularised in Matter No IRC 2372 of 2008 to which the defendant entered a plea of guilty.' 'The defendant is fined the sum of $130,000 with half that sum to be paid to the prosecutor by way of...