District Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: SafeWork NSW v TJN Construction Group Pty Ltd [2024] NSWDC 563 Hearing dates: 24 September 2024 Date of orders: 28 November 2024 Decision date: 28 November 2024 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Strathdee DCJ Decision: (1) The defendant is convicted.
(2) The appropriate fine for the offence is $400,000 and that will be reduced by 25% to reflect the plea of guilty, leaving a fine of $300,000.
(3) In exercising my discretion under s 6 of the Fines Act 1996 (NSW), that fine will be reduced by one third.
(4) Accordingly, I order the defendant to pay a fine of $200,000.
(5) Pursuant to s 122(2) of the Fines Act 1996 (NSW), 50% of the fine imposed is to be paid to the prosecutor.
(6) Pursuant to s 257B of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), the defendant is to pay the prosecutor’s costs, as agreed or assessed.
Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – prosecution – work health and safety – duty of persons undertaking business – risk of death or serious injury – recklessness – maximum penalty
SENTENCE – objective seriousness – mitigating factors – aggravating factors – plea of guilty – appropriate discount for the utility of the plea – general deterrence – specific deterrence – remorse and contrition – parity – maximum penalties – capacity to pay
COSTS – prosecutor’s costs
Legislation Cited: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 21A, 22
Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 257B
Fines Act 1996 (NSW), ss 6, 122
Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (NSW), ss 3, 19(1), 31, 32, 242B
Work Health and Safety Regulation 2017 (NSW), cll 44, 51, 52, 299, 312, 344, 355
Cases Cited: Bulga Underground Operations Pty Ltd v Nash (2016) 93 NSWLR 338; [2016] NSWCCA 37
Capral Aluminium Ltd v WorkCover Authority (NSW) (2000) 49 NSWLR 610; [2000] NSWIRComm 71
Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Gregory (2011) 34 VR 1; [2011] VSCA 145
Environmental Protection Authority v Barnes [2006] NSWCCA 246
Ferguson v Nelmac Pty Ltd (1999) 92 IR 188
Fisher v Samaras Industries Pty Ltd (1996) 82 IR 384
Haynes v CI & D Manufacturing Pty Limited (No 2); Callaghan v CI & D Industries Pty Limited (No 2) (1995) 60 IR 455
Inspector Beacham v J & L Marble Pty Ltd [2009] NSWIRComm 100
Inspector Fraser vKarabelas(No2) [2011] NSWIRComm 153
Jahandideh v R [2014] NSWCCA 178
Jimmy v The Queen (2010) 77 NSWLR 540; [2010] NSWCCA 60
Kirk v Industrial Court (NSW) 234 CLR 531; [2010] HCA 1
Latoudis v Casey [1990] HCA 59; (1990) 170 CLR 534
Lawrenson Diecasting Pty Ltd v WorkCover Authority(NSW) (1999) 90 IR 464
Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25
McColl v John Watson Building Services Pty Ltd (2004) 137 IR 310; [2004] NSWIRComm 353
Morrison v Powercoal Pty Ltd (No 3) (2005) 147 IR 117; [2005] NSWIRComm 61
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read SafeWork NSW v TJN Construction Group 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
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2024] NSWDC 563
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to consider various legal issues, including the objective seriousness of the offence, mitigating and aggravating factors, the utility of the defendant's guilty plea, and the need for general and specific deterrence. Additionally, the court assessed the defendant’s capacity to pay and the principles of parity in sentencing. Given the maximum penalties available for the offences, the court also had to determine the appropriate fine while balancing the need for deterrence against the mitigating factors presented.
The court found that the breaches were serious, with a high risk of death or serious injury. However, it also recognised the defendant's early guilty plea, which warranted a reduction in the fine. The court applied a 25% discount for the plea, followed by a further one-third reduction under the Fines Act 1996 (NSW). Consequently, the court imposed a fine of $200,000, with half of that amount payable to the prosecutor. Furthermore, the defendant was ordered to pay the prosecutor’s costs as per the relevant statutory provisions.
The final orders of the court were that the defendant is convicted of the offence. The fine imposed is $200,000, with 50% payable to the prosecutor. Additionally, the defendant is to pay the prosecutor’s costs as per the statutory provisions.
Orders
Orders of the court
(1) The defendant is convicted.
(2) The appropriate fine for the offence is $400,000 and that will be reduced by 25% to reflect the plea of guilty, leaving a fine of $300,000.
(3) In exercising my discretion under s 6 of the Fines Act 1996 (NSW), that fine will be reduced by one third.
(4) Accordingly, I order the defendant to pay a fine of $200,000.
(5) Pursuant to s 122(2) of the Fines Act 1996 (NSW), 50% of the fine imposed is to be paid to the prosecutor.
(6) Pursuant to s 257B of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), the defendant is to pay the prosecutor’s costs, as agreed or assessed.
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.