WorkCover (Inspector Calvez) v TAFE Commission

Link copied
Case Copied 11 min read

District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: WorkCover (Inspector Calvez) v TAFE Commission [2014] NSWDC 108
Hearing dates:14/07/2014
Decision date: 14 July 2014
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: Curtis J
Decision:

Defendant is convicted

Defendant is fined $300,000 with a moiety to the prosecutor

The defendant is to pay the prosecutor's costs as agreed or assessed

Legislation Cited: Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Cases Cited: Tesco v Nattrass [1972] AC 153
Meridian Global Funds managment Pty Ltd v Securities Commission [1995] 3 All ER 918
Commonwealth v Intovigne [1982] HCA 40; 150 CLR 258
Cahill v State of NSW (Department of Community Services) (No 4) [2008] NSWIRComm 201
Category:Sentence
Parties: WorkCover Authority of New South Wales (Inspector Amanda Clavez) (Prosecutor)
Technical & Further Education Commission (also known as TAFE Commission) (Defendant)
Representation: M P Cahill appeared for the Prosecutor
M L Shume appeared for the Defendant
WorkCover Authority of New South Wales (Prosecutor)
Department of Education & Legal Services (Defendant)
File Number(s):2012/333950

REMARKS ON SENTENCE

HIS HONOUR:

  1. On 24 March 2009 Sarah Waugh, then aged 18 and a relatively inexperienced rider, was fatally injured when, in the course of a riding lesson, she fell from a horse named Dargo as the horse broke into an uncontrolled gallop approaching an open gate leading to its stable.

  1. The riding lesson was part of a course conducted by the Dubbo Rural Skills and Environment Centre where Ms Waugh was enrolled as an agricultural student. The centre was owned and operated by the Technical and Further Education Commission (TAFE).

  1. TAFE has pleaded guilty to the charge that, contrary to its duties under section 8(2) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000, it failed to ensure that Ms Waugh was not exposed to risk.

  1. Dargo was supplied to the Dubbo Centre by Mr Glenn Manton, an experienced horseman and horse trainer, who had contracted to supply to the Dubbo Centre, horses which were "quiet and suitable for beginner riders". The horse was purchased by Mr Manton on 16 February 2009 from Mr John McKinnon, a local racehorse trainer, and delivered to the Centre on 23 February 2009.

  1. Although Dargo was described as "pretty quiet" by his track rider and "quiet, well behaved and did not show any signs of being nervous, flighty or temperamental" by another experienced observer, he was unsuitable for use by a relatively inexperienced rider such as Ms Waugh because he was a thoroughbred racehorse who had last raced on 7 February 2009, approximately six weeks before the incident.

  1. It is well known that as a consequence of race training thoroughbred horses are unlikely to be suitable for beginner novice riders in the absence of retraining and reconditioning. Such training is directed to making the horse more unresponsive to unintentional and inappropriate cues from inexperienced riders.

  1. On 23 February Dargo was assessed by Mr Geoffrey Bastian, the head teacher of the course, and Ms Sara Falkiner, the teacher assigned to…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read WorkCover (Inspector Calvez) v TAFE Commission 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
[2014] NSWDC 108
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the court involved WorkCover, represented by Inspector Calvez, against the TAFE Commission. The dispute centered around allegations of non-compliance with occupational health and safety regulations, specifically regarding the provision of a safe working environment. The matter was heard in the Melbourne Magistrates' Court.

The primary legal issues that the court needed to address were whether the TAFE Commission had failed to ensure that its employees were provided with a safe working environment, and if so, whether such failure amounted to a breach of statutory duties under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. The court also had to consider the appropriate penalties and orders that should be imposed in the event of a finding of non-compliance.

In delivering its judgment, the court found that the TAFE Commission had indeed failed to meet its statutory obligations by not providing a safe working environment. This failure was deemed serious enough to warrant criminal sanctions. The court emphasised the importance of occupational health and safety in educational institutions and highlighted the need for stringent compliance with safety regulations. As a result of the findings, the court convicted the defendant and imposed a substantial fine of $300,000, half of which was to be paid to the prosecutor. Additionally, the TAFE Commission was ordered to pay the prosecutor's costs as agreed or assessed.

Orders

Orders of the court

Defendant is convicted

Defendant is fined $300,000 with a moiety to the prosecutor

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.