SafeWork NSW v MACFIN Building Solutions Pty Ltd

Link copied
Case Copied 32 min read

District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: SafeWork NSW v MACFIN Building Solutions Pty Ltd [2020] NSWDC 776
Hearing dates: 27 November 2020
Date of orders: 18 December 2020
Decision date: 18 December 2020
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: Strathdee DCJ
Decision:

(1)   The defendant is convicted.

(2)   The appropriate fine is $200,000.00 and that will be reduced by 25% to reflect a plea of guilty.

(3)   Accordingly, I order defendant pay a fine of $150,000.00.

(4) Pursuant to s 122(2) of the Fines Act 1996 (NSW), 50% of the fine imposed is to be paid to the prosecutor.

(5)   I make no order as to costs.

Catchwords:

CRIME – work health and safety – risk of death or serious injury – duty of person undertaking business

PROCEDURAL – reasonable practicability – likelihood of risk – knowledge of the risk – what the defendant ought reasonably have known

OTHER – fall from height in unprotected void – risk of the dangers posed by the void were known – failure to adequately implement work health and safety management system plan – inadequate fall protection

Legislation Cited:

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)

Fines Act 1996 (NSW)

Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (NSW)

Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011 (NSW)

Cases Cited:

Bulga Underground Operations v Nash [2016] NSWCCA 37; (2016) 93 NSWLR 338

Capral Aluminium Limited v WorkCover Authority of NSW [2000] NSWIRComm 71; (2000) 49 NSWLR 610

Environmental Protection Authority v Barnes [2006] NSWCCA 246

Fisher v Samaras Industries Pty Ltd (1996) 82 IR 384

Inspector Howard v BaulderstoneHornibrook Pty Ltd [2009] NSWIRComm 92

Kirk v Industrial Commission of New South Wales; Kirk Group Holdings Pty Ltd v WorkCover Authority of New South Wales (Inspector Childs) (2010) 239 CLR 531; [2010] HCA 1

LawrensonDiecasting Pty Ltd v WorkCover Authority of New South Wales (1999) 90 IR 464

Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357

Morrison v Powercoal Pty Limited & Anor(No.3) [2005] NSWIRComm 61

Nash v Silver City Drilling (NSW) Pty Limited; Attorney General for NSW v Silver City Drilling (NSW) Pty Limited [2017] NSWCCA 96

Orbit Drilling v The Queen; Smith v The Queen [2012] VSCA 82

R v Cage [2006] NSWCCA 304

R v Miria [2009] NSWCCA 68

SafeWork NSW v Emu Group Pty Limited [2019] NSWDC 537

SafeWork NSW v HCM Building Pty Limited [2019] NSWDC 632

Veen v R (No. 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465

WorkCover Authority (NSW) v Profab Industries Pty Ltd (2000) 49 NSWLR 700

Texts Cited:

SafeWork Australia Managing the Risk of Falls at the Workplace Code of Practice (April 2016)

WorkCover Preventing Falls in Housing Construction Code of Practice (July 2014)

Category:Sentence
Parties: SafeWork NSW (Prosecutor)
MACFIN Building Solutions Pty Ltd (Defendant)
Representation:

Counsel: Ms S Callan SC with Mr Hawila (Prosecutor)

Solicitors: Ms B Ng, Department of Customer Service
Mr D Finlay (Company Director of Defendant - in person, unrepresented)
File Number(s): 2019/00178325
Publication restriction: Nil
  1. JUDGMENT

  2. On 31 August 2020, MACFIN Building…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read SafeWork NSW v MACFIN Building Solutions Pty Ltd and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2020] NSWDC 776
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

SafeWork NSW brought an action against MACFIN Building Solutions Pty Ltd in relation to a serious incident involving a fall from height in an unprotected void at a construction site. The matter was heard in the Local Court of New South Wales. The dispute centred around the defendant's failure to implement adequate work health and safety measures, leading to the risk of death or serious injury to workers. The court had to determine whether the defendant's actions breached their duty under work health and safety legislation and whether the risk of the fall was reasonably practicable to mitigate.

The court considered the legal principles surrounding the reasonable practicability of mitigating risks, the likelihood of the risk materialising, and the knowledge or what ought reasonably to have been known by the defendant. It was established that the risk of the dangers posed by the void were known to the defendant, and there was a failure to adequately implement the work health and safety management system plan, specifically in relation to fall protection. The court found that the defendant's actions constituted a breach of their duty, as they failed to take all reasonably practicable steps to ensure the safety of workers.

The defendant was convicted and fined $200,000.00, reduced by 25% due to the plea of guilty, resulting in a fine of $150,000.00. Under section 122(2) of the Fines Act 1996 (NSW), 50% of the fine was to be paid to the prosecutor. The court did not make an order as to costs. This decision underscores the importance of adherence to work health and safety standards in construction sites to prevent serious injuries and fatalities.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) The defendant is convicted.

(2) The appropriate fine is $200,000.00 and that will be reduced by 25% to reflect a plea of guilty.

(3) Accordingly, I order defendant pay a fine of $150,000.00.

(4) Pursuant to s 122(2) of the Fines Act 1996 (NSW), 50% of the fine imposed is to be paid to the prosecutor.

(5) I make no order as to costs.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.