SafeWork NSW v Perry's Roofing Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2022] NSWDC 261
•14 July 2022
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
SafeWork NSW v Perry's Roofing Pty Ltd [2022] NSWDC 261
[2022] NSWDC 261
14 July 2022
CaseChat Overview and Summary
SafeWork NSW brought proceedings against Perry's Roofing Pty Ltd in the Local Court of New South Wales. The prosecution arose from a workplace incident where a worker was electrocuted and another suffered severe flash burns while dismantling edge protection on a roof. The incident occurred due to contact between energised power lines and a steel hand rail the worker was holding. The prosecution alleged that Perry's Roofing Pty Ltd failed to conduct a site-specific risk assessment, did not ensure power lines were de-energised, and did not provide an adequate Safe Work Method Statement for the roofing work.
The court had to determine the appropriate penalty for the breaches of work health and safety laws, taking into account the objective seriousness of the offence, mitigating and aggravating factors, the company's plea of guilty, and the need for general and specific deterrence. The court also needed to consider the company's capacity to pay an appropriate penalty and the impact on the victims. The prosecution sought a substantial fine, costs, and an order for a portion of the fine to be paid to the prosecutor.
The court found Perry's Roofing Pty Ltd guilty and imposed a fine of $600,000, reduced by 25% due to the early plea of guilty. The court ordered the company to pay $450,000 in fines and mandated that 50% of this amount be paid to the prosecutor. Additionally, the court ordered the company to pay the prosecution's costs. The court emphasised the importance of work health and safety compliance to prevent such tragedies in the future.
The court had to determine the appropriate penalty for the breaches of work health and safety laws, taking into account the objective seriousness of the offence, mitigating and aggravating factors, the company's plea of guilty, and the need for general and specific deterrence. The court also needed to consider the company's capacity to pay an appropriate penalty and the impact on the victims. The prosecution sought a substantial fine, costs, and an order for a portion of the fine to be paid to the prosecutor.
The court found Perry's Roofing Pty Ltd guilty and imposed a fine of $600,000, reduced by 25% due to the early plea of guilty. The court ordered the company to pay $450,000 in fines and mandated that 50% of this amount be paid to the prosecutor. Additionally, the court ordered the company to pay the prosecution's costs. The court emphasised the importance of work health and safety compliance to prevent such tragedies in the future.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Criminal Law
Legal Concepts
-
Criminal Liability
-
Plea of Guilty
-
Fines
-
Prosecution Costs
-
Risk of Death or Serious Injury
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Titan Plant Hire Pty Ltd v Work Health Authority and Madalena v Work Health Authority [2023] NTSC 88
Cases Citing This Decision
8
SafeWork NSW v Prime Metal Roofing Pty Ltd
[2023] NSWDC 15
SafeWork NSW v Riverwall Constructions Pty Ltd
[2022] NSWDC 408
SafeWork NSW v Perry's Roofing Pty Ltd [No. 2]
[2022] NSWDC 262
Cases Cited
15
Statutory Material Cited
4
Baumer v R
[1988] HCA 67
Baumer v R
[1988] HCA 67
Bulga Underground Operations Pty Ltd v Nash
[2016] NSWCCA 37