Di Tonto v The Queen; AM Design and Construction Pty Ltd v The Queen

In this case, the appellants, Di Tonto and AM Design and Construction Pty Ltd, were involved in a criminal dispute with the respondent, The Queen, concerning their violations under the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004. The appellants were found guilty of failing to ensure that individuals not employed by them were not exposed to certain risks, resulting in significant harm. The sentencing judge imposed fines of $100,000 on Di Tonto and $380,000 on AM Design and Construction Pty Ltd. Both appellants appealed the severity of these fines, arguing that they were manifestly excessive.

The court was required to determine whether the fines imposed on the appellants were appropriate, considering the nature of the offences, the culpability of the parties, and the principles of sentencing for such offences. The key legal issues included the adequacy of the fines in relation to the gravity of the offences and the capacity of the appellants to pay. The court also needed to consider whether the fines were disproportionate to the sentences typically imposed for similar offences under the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

The court found that the fines imposed by the sentencing judge were manifestly excessive and not in line with the sentencing principles applicable to such offences. The appellants' argument that the fines were disproportionate was supported by the fact that they operated as a small business, and the fines imposed were likely to have a crippling effect on the business. The court acknowledged the appellants' genuine remorse and the steps they had taken to rectify the situation but concluded that the fines needed to be adjusted to reflect a more balanced approach to sentencing. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and in lieu of the original fines, the court imposed fines of $50,000 on Di Tonto and $190,000 on AM Design and Construction Pty Ltd.