Our compliance and enforcement activities may lead to prosecutions being filed in the South Australian Employment Tribunal and the Magistrates Court.

A prosecution may start either by our own initiative or following our consideration of a request from a person under Section 231(1) of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA).

Prosecutors must prove the relevant elements of the offence and in the case of a Category 1 offence, that the conduct was reckless and without reasonable excuse.

Recent convictions

  • Dial-a-tow Australia Pty Ltd and Ahrns Handling Equipment Pty Ltd

    Martyn Campbell v Dial-a-tow Australia Pty Ltd (First Defendant) and Ahrns Handling Equipment Pty Ltd (Second Defendant)

    Dial A Tow Australia and the manufacturer of the tilt tray, AHRNS Handling Equipment, were both charged with contraventions of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA) following a SafeWork SA investigation following the death of a worker in 2018.

    AHRNS pleaded guilty in the South Australian Employment Tribunal following the withdrawal of some of the particulars of the alleged contraventions.

    Dial A Tow pleaded not guilty and, in those circumstances, the sentencing of AHRNS was deferred pending the determination of the charge against Dial A Tow.

    A trainee tow truck driver sustained fatal injuries when he was crushed between a fixed headboard and toolbox behind the cabin of a tilt tray tow truck and a mechanically sliding tray on 14 March 2018.

    A sentencing hearing was held on 18 August 2022 with the judgement handed down by Deputy President Judge Rossi on 13 September 2022.

    A conviction has been recorded against Dial a Tow Australia and a fine of $600,000 imposed.

    Further payments of $11,454.50 for the agreed costs of the proceedings and a victims of crime levy in the sum of $405 were also ordered.

    A conviction was recorded against AHRNS and a $350,000 fine imposed.

    Proceedings costs of $3,605 and a victims of crime levy of $405 were also ordered.

    It also brought to the court’s attention that it actively discourages its clients from operating tilt trays with the modified design and that it cooperated with SafeWork SA and Dial A Tow after the incident to develop a suitable engineering solution.

    15 September 2022


    Maverick Steel Pty Ltd

    Martyn Campbell v Maverick Steel Pty Ltd

    Maverick Steel Pty Ltd pleaded guilty to all three counts in the South Australia Employment Tribunal (SAET) for breaches of its duties under section 32 of the WHS Act.

    The 51-year-old man was replacing roofing sheets with the company’s co-owner at its rented premises in Webb Street, Port Adelaide, when he fell 6.5 metres onto a concrete floor. He did not have any formal training or licences for working from heights. In addition, he was not provided with any safety equipment and was working unsupervised at the time of the incident.

    The Tribunal recorded a conviction against the company and imposed a fine of $100,000.

    The company was also ordered to install a shed for Kura Yerlo Inc and a plaque dedicated to the deceased 51-year-old man.

    Kura Yerlo Inc provides services that allow Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander persons to learn trade and work health and safety skills.

    The company has also been ordered to arrange for one of its workers to undertake a Certificate IV in Work Health and Safety within the next 12 months.

    12 August 2022


    Pacific Salt Pty Ltd

    Martyn Campbell v Pacific Salt Pty Ltd

    Pacific Salt Pty Ltd pled guilty and was sentenced in the South Australian Employment Tribunal (SAET) for breaching their health and safety duty and exposing their workers to an unsafe work environment.

    In April 2020, a young worker suffered injury after her right arm was trapped between a roller and the motorised belt of a conveyor.

    The return rollers of the conveyor were unguarded, and the conveyor was not fitted with an emergency stop device.

    The worker sustained serious injuries requiring hospitalisation and several surgical treatments to her arm.

    The SAET convicted Pacific Salt Pty Ltd and imposed a fine of $75,000 (after discount for early guilty plea) plus legal costs and the Victim of Crime levy.

    3 August 2022


    Infuse Bottling Company Pty Ltd

    Martyn Campbell v Infuse Bottling Company Pty Ltd

    Infuse Bottling Company Pty Ltd was sentenced in the South Australian Employment Tribunal (SAET) on 18 May 2022, after being found guilty of failing to ensure the health and safety of its workers and failing to comply with a Prohibition Notice.

    The bottling plant was purchased from a vendor in China who was required to install the plant to Australian Standards. The vendor sent installers from China who did not have the correct trade qualifications and did not complete the installation to Australian Standards.

    An independent electrical contractor conducting work on the premises observed that the cabling did not meet Australian Standards. The contractor brought this to the attention of the Production Manager.

    It was recommended that a full audit of the QPM2 electrical wiring be carried out before the line was energised.

    An audit report was provided to the Infuse Bottling Company which identified the plant as being unsafe. On 26 February 2019, the electrical contractor locked out the electrical switch pad for the bottling line until the wiring could be brought up to Australian Standards.

    Despite the lock out, the company continued to use the bottling line and exposed their employees to risk of injury or death.

    On 16 April 2019, SafeWork SA issued the company a Prohibition Notice on the bottling plant. Infuse Bottling Company told the SafeWork SA Inspector that it had spoken to the installers about the electrical concerns and had been assured that the bottling line was safe to operate.

    The bottling line had been used extensively between the lock out on 26 February 2019 and the issuing of the Prohibition Notice on 16 April 2019.

    Despite the bottling line being subject to a Prohibition Notice, Infuse Bottling Company continued to use it.

    Infuse Bottling Company Pty Ltd pleaded guilty in the SAET to all three offences.

    The SAET convicted Infuse Bottling Company Pty Ltd and imposed fines of $135,000, $10,000 and $50,000. This was reduced to a total $136,500 after a 30% discount for early guilty plea plus legal costs. The Magistrate further reduced the fine to $120,000 plus legal costs due to financial hardship.

    25 May 2022


    Angus Roberts

    Martyn Campbell v Angus Roberts

    Angus Roberts pleaded guilty in the South Australian Employment Tribunal (SAET) for breaches of section 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA) and reg 342(1) of the Work Health and Safety Regulations 2012 (SA).

    In September 2019 Mr Roberts, a refrigeration mechanic, and the owner of the business he was working at sustained burns when a flammable substance caught fire. The business premises also received fire damage.

    Mr Roberts was replacing a refrigeration condenser of a food display unit when he mistakenly used propane gas to charge the new condenser. While attempting to remove the propane some escaped in gas and liquid form. It ignited and caused a sudden fire.

    The defendants admit that they did not have safety protocols in place and had not carried out a proper risk assessment. He also also admits to decanting the chemical substances into smaller canisters which he failed to label or label correctly.

    The SAET convicted Mr Roberts and imposed a fine of $50,000 (reduced to $33,000 after discount for early guilty plea) for the s32 offence and $3,000 (reduced to $2,000 after discount) for the reg 342 offence. Mr Roberts must also pay legal fees and the Victim of Crime levy.

    16 March 2022


    F Laucke Proprietary Limited

    Martyn Campbell v F Laucke Proprietary Limited

    F Laucke Proprietary Limited pleaded guilty in the South Australian Employment Tribunal (SAET) for breaches of section 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA).

    In October 2020 a worker suffered fatal injuries when they were crushed and asphyxiated in a pneumatic slide-gate.

    Workers were periodically required to access the inside of the surge bin of a pellet press to clean and maintain it. It was possible for a worker to access the interior of the surge bin through an access hole at the top of the bin. This access hole was covered by a hatch that was not interlocked and could be opened without tools. Materials were fed into the surge bin from two other bins located above the surge bin. The flow of materials between the bins was controlled by a pneumatic slide-gate. When the pneumatic slide-gate was open, it would move to cover the access hole.

    It was possible for a worker to remotely operate parts of the pellet press, including the pneumatic slide-gate, from a control room. It was also possible for a worker to access the interior of the surge bin while the pneumatic slide-gate was operational. There was a risk that a worker’s head, neck and/or body may be struck and/or crushed by the pneumatic slide-gate whilst accessing the interior of the surge bin.

    On the day of his death, the worker attempted to clean the build-up of mash at the bottom on the surge bin. As per instructions, the workers asked the press operator to close off the airline to the hydraulic gate. Unfortunately, closing off the air supply had failed to isolate the slide gate and prevent it from activating.

    F Laucke Proprietary Limited exposed workers to a risk of serious injury or death by failing to ensure, so far as was reasonably practicable:

    • a safe work environment as it was possible for a worker to access the inside of the surge bin while the pneumatic slide-gate was operational
    • a safe system of work for the task, as they did not perform an adequate hazard identification and risk assessment process which properly identified and assessed the above mentioned risk.

    The SAET convicted F Laucke Proprietary Limited and imposed a fine of $650,000 (reduced to $390,000 after discount for early guilty plea) plus legal fees.

    22 February 2022

  • J.M.A Engineering Pty Ltd

    Martyn Campbell v J.M.A Engineering Pty Ltd

    J.M.A Engineering Pty Ltd pleaded guilty in the South Australian Employment Tribunal (SAET) for breaches of section 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA).

    In March 2019 a worker suffered crush injuries to their hand when it became caught in a de-coiler machine.

    J.M.A Engineering Pty Ltd exposed workers to a risk of serious injury by failing to ensure, so far as was reasonably practicable:

    • a safe system of work for the task by not completing an adequate hazard identification and risk assessment process specific to the use of the de-coiler roller (including the application of protective layers to the roll)
    • a safe working environment by not adequately guarding the rollers during the operation of the de-coiler roller and
    • workers maintained a safe distance from the pinch point of the de-coiler machine.

    The SAET convicted J.M.A Engineering Pty Ltd and imposed a fine of $66,000 (after discount for early guilty plea) plus legal fees.

    9 September 2021


    City Demolitions and Earthmoving Pty Ltd

    Martyn Campbell v City Demolitions and Earthmoving Pty Ltd

    City Demolitions and Earthmoving Pty Ltd pleaded guilty in the South Australian Employment Tribunal (SAET) for breaches of section 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA).

    In March 2019 a worker suffered serious injuries when struck by a falling ramp of a low loader trailer while performing work inside the drop zone of its 230kg ramps. The ramps suddenly fell due to a failure of the hydraulic ram system, after their safety chain restraint system had been loosened so that the worker could open a storage box located between the ramps.

    The worker suffered severe traumatic injuries including fractures to his spine, pelvis, ankles, legs and ribs.

    City Demolitions and Earthmoving was charged with one work place safety offence of failing to provide, so far as was reasonably practicable, safe plant and a safe system of work, thereby exposing him to a risk of death.

    The SAET convicted City Demolitions and Earthmoving Pty Ltd and imposed a fine of $133,000 (after discount for early guilty plea) plus legal fees.

    30 July 2021


    Matt's Carpentry Pty Ltd

    Martyn Campbell v Matt's Carpentry Pty Ltd and Matthew Pincin

    Matt’s Carpentry Pty Ltd and Matthew Pincin pleaded guilty in the South Australian Employment Tribunal (SAET) for breaches of section 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA).

    In December 2018 an apprentice carpenter fell from a height over three metres onto a concrete surface from a first floor of a residential building.

    The worker was undertaking wood framing on the first floor of a residential building. The worker was walking backwards unrolling some building material and fell through an unprotected and uncovered void, where a stairwell was to be installed.

    The injured worker was hospitalised with spinal injuries requiring surgery and a fracture of the pelvis.

    Matt’s Carpentry Pty Ltd was charged with failing to:

    • provide and maintain a safe working environment
    • ensure a safe system of work for the task undertaken
    • perform an adequate risk assessment and identify the hazard of working near an unguarded void
    • ensure appropriate control measures were in place to eliminate or reduce the risk of fall.

    Matthew Pincin, as the director and supervisor, was charged for failing to:

    • ensure appropriate hazard and risk assessment processes were in place for the task to be undertaken.

    Both the company and director's failures exposed the worker to a risk of serious injury or death.

    The SAET convicted Matt’s Carpentry Pty Ltd and imposed a fine of $90,000 (after discount for early guilty plea) plus legal fees.

    Matthew Pincin was convicted and imposed a fine of $21,000 (after discount for early guilty plea) plus legal fees.

    23 July 2021


    Woolworths Group Ltd

    Martyn Campbell v Woolworths Group Limited

    Woolworths Group pleaded guilty in the South Australia Employment Tribunal (SAET) for breaches of section 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA).

    In 2018 a supermarket worker was moving a two metre high bakery trolley which had been loaded with bread products from the bakery of the supermarket. While manoeuvring the trolley a wheel or wheels of the trolley jammed, causing the trolley to fall on to the worker. The worker sustained multiple injuries including a fractured back. The worker required surgery and spent 6 months off work.

    Following the incident it was found that the solid tyres on all four wheels of the trolley had signs of deterioration. All of the tyre treads had separated from the rim of the wheel. The movement of the trolley was compromised by the separation of the tyres from the rim of the wheels, and by a loose strip of rubber hanging off the side of the tread. Moreover, the rim had cut into the tread and thus widened it, with the prospect that the rim may have wedged itself between the wheel rim and the side plate, stopping rotation of the wheel. The wheels and tyres of the trolley were found to be old, degraded, and poorly maintained. The fully loaded trolley was also found to be top heavy and could easily topple if the wheels became jammed.

    Woolworths had inspection and maintenance systems in place for other equipment but here was no system of inspection and maintenance in relation to the bakery trolleys.

    The defendant breached its duty by failing to provide any system for the inspection and maintenance of the bakery trolleys.

    The SAET convicted Woolworths and imposed a fine of $72,000 (after 40% discount for early guilty plea) plus legal fees.

    17 March 2021


    Gilmac Pty Ltd

    Martyn Campbell v Gilmac Pty Ltd

    Gilmac Pty Ltd pleaded guilty in the South Australia Employment Tribunal (SAET) for breaches of their duties under section 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA).

    In 2017 a worker was standing on the mezzanine platform of a hay press attempting to clear residue from the press with what is referred to as a ‘metal bale’. The metal bale, a section of I-beam with metal plates welded on the ends, measured 1192mm x 152mm x 152mm and weighed approximately 31.5 kg, was being manoeuvred into position on the press’s weigh table when it became stuck.

    The worker attempted to dislodge the metal bale from behind the platform’s guardrail and fell approximately 3 metres onto the weigh table below. The weight of the worker and the metal bale activated the operation of the hay press, resulting in the amputation of both the worker’s legs below the knees.

    The hay press had a lock out mechanism whereby a padlock could be placed to isolate the hay press from its energy source. Once locked out, the automation of the hay press was prevented. The hay press had not been isolated as the worker was moving the metal bale in preparation for clearing the residue at a later time.

    The hay processing machine involved has not been used since the incident. A new machine is being built, and has been designed with health and safety considerations in mind.

    The defendant breached its duty because:

    • it failed to undertake a risk assessment of the plant as required by regulation 34 of the Work health and Safety Regulations 2012
    • it failed, so far as was reasonably practicable, to equip the plant with suitable interlocked guarding to minimise the risk of a worker being exposed to hazardous activation of the transfer pusher platen followed by the press base toggle by slipping onto the weigh table area
    • it failed, so far as was reasonably practicable, to minimise the risk that a worker who was required to undertake tasks that necessitated the climbing over or under the handrail above the weigh table area, might slip and cause hazardous motion of the actuators in the weigh table area by the provision and maintenance of safe operating procedures requiring that the unguarded plant be locked out prior to accessing the area
    • it failed to provide, so far as was reasonably practicable, a safe means of accessing the weigh table for the purpose of preparing to clear and clearing the Index with a metal bale by, for example, providing stairs and a guarded platform.

    The SAET convicted Gilmac and imposed a fine of $245,000 (after 30% discount for early guilty plea), and legal fees.

    5 March 2021


    White Crane and Rigging Service

    Martyn Campbell v White Family Property Investments Pty Ltd (trading as White Crane and Rigging Service) and Ashley White

    White Family Property Investments Pty Ltd trading as White Crane and Rigging Service and Ashley White both pleaded guilty in the South Australia Employment Tribunal (SAET) for breaches of their duties under section 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA).

    In December 2017, White Crane and Rigging Service were engaged to remove pine trees at residential premises.

    Ashley White, as an employee of the business, was operating the 130 tonne crane that had been supplied by another business. While carrying out the task, the crane cables became entangled. Mr White lowered the boom and overrode the safety switch, resulting in the crane toppling over and damaging beyond repair two motor vehicles parked nearby and narrowly missing one of the vehicle's owners. The damage to the vehicles resulted in significant financial loss to the owners' businesses.

    White Crane and Rigging Service was charged for failing to:

    • adequately plan for the job including providing a risk assessment to the crane operator
    • ensure the operator completed an adequate job safety analysis prior to undertaking the task including assessing the site for hazards and applying control measures.

    Ashley White as the operator of the crane was charged for breaching his health and safety duty by:

    • overloading the crane causing it to tip and creating a risk of serious injury or death to others
    • failing to accurately measure and record data in the crane’s computer system
    • failing to ensure that the lift was in the safe working limits of the crane
    • overriding the crane’s safety function.

    Convictions against both defendants were recorded.

    Pecuniary penalties were not issued with the SAET noting the financial circumstances of the defendants. Had penalties been applied they would have resulted in a $150,000 fine to the company and a $15,000 fine to the crane operator.

    24 February 2021


    Zerella Holdings

    Martyn Campbell v Zerella Holdings Pty Ltd

    Zerella Holdings Pty Ltd pleaded guilty to a breach of section 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA). It breached its s19 duty to ensure the safety of workers whilst at work thereby exposing them to the risk of serious injury or death.

    In October 2017, a male worker was injured whilst attempting to clean a sump pump which had been raised from a potato wash pit. As he leant over his clothing was caught in an unguarded rotating agitator shaft, dragging him into the pit and spinning him around the agitator shaft until all of the clothing on his upper body had been torn off. He was then flung onto a platform within the pit, thereby avoiding falling into the water.

    The worker sustained injuries including fractures, lacerations and friction burns resulting in ongoing impairment.

    Zerella breached their health and safety duty because it failed to:

    • ensure provision and maintenance of safe plant including guards around the rotating PTO shaft
    • ensure there was a safe system of work to minimise the risk of injury
    • prepare a Safe Operating Procedure that related to the plant and tasks
    • provide adequate supervision when undertaking the task
    • adequately train workers to undertake the task safely.

    Zerella has subsequently reviewed its safety procedures and implemented extensive safety measures and improved staffing.

    The South Australian Employment Tribunal (SAET) convicted Zerella and imposed a fine of $210,000 (after 30% discount for early guilty plea), and legal fees.

    10 February 2021


    Lightforce Asset & Civil Allied Technical Construction

    Martyn Campbell v Lightforce Asset Pty Ltd and Civil and Allied Technical Construction Pty Ltd

    Lightforce Asset Pty Ltd and Civil and Allied Technical Construction Pty Ltd both pleaded guilty to a breach of their health and safety duty under section 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA) for exposing a person to risk of serious injury or death.

    In February 2018, a male worker was driving long piers into the ground using a hydraulic pile driver when it jammed. As the worker investigated to fix the machine, the device freed, crushing him to death.

    Lightforce breached their health and safety duty because it failed to:

    • ensure a hazard identification and risk assessment was completed to identify risk or injury
    • ensure the worker operated within the guidelines of Safe Work Method Statements
    • maintain the pile driver as is reasonably practicable and fit for purpose.

    Civil and Allied Technical Construction Pty Ltd breached their health and safety duty because it failed to:

    • use a safe system of work to minimise the risk of injury
    • complete a hazard analysis and risk assessment prior to undertaking the task
    • prepare a safe operating procedure that related to the plant and tasks.

    The South Australian Employment Tribunal (SAET) imposed convictions on both defendants.

    Lightforce Asset Pty Ltd was convicted by the South Australian Employment Tribunal and fined $300,000 (after 40% discount for early guilty plea).

    Civil and Allied Technical Construction Pty Ltd was convicted by the South Australian Employment Tribunal and fined $450,000 (after 40% discount for early guilty plea).

    21 January 2021

  • Minda Incorporated

    Martyn Campbell v Minda Incorporated

    Minda Incorporated pleaded guilty to a breach of its health and safety duty under the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA).

    In early 2018, a female employee of Minda was sexually assaulted by a client of Minda when she was visiting the premises at which that client lived. Minda knew of the existence of the risk of sexual assault.

    Minda was found to have failed to:

    • provide adequate supervision of the client
    • provide adequate information about the risk to the employee
    • inform the employee of the requirements visitors were to adhere to when attending the premises.

    The South Australian Employment Tribunal (SAET) imposed a conviction, a fine of $42,000 (reduced by 30% from $60,000 for the defendant’s early guilty plea) and ordered Minda to pay legal costs.

    16 December 2020


    H&T Cook Enterprises and Tiarne Cook

    Martyn Campbell v H&T Cook Enterprises and Tiarne Cook

    H&T Cook Enterprises pleaded guilty to a breach of its health and safety duty under the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA) and a conviction recorded. As the company has since sold the café and no longer has assets or income, no fine was imposed. Had the business continued to operate, a fine of $110,000 before application of the sentencing discount for an early guilty plea would have been imposed.

    Tiarne Cook pleaded guilty to a breach of her health and safety duty under the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA) and was fined $18,000 (after reduction of 40%) with no conviction recorded. The defendant was also directed to pay SafeWork SA's legal costs, court costs and the Victims of Crime Levy.

    On 15 August 2018 an employee of the defendants was in the process of refuelling the ethanol burner located in the café when it ignited into flame. The employee sustained burns to her face, hands, ears and neck.

    H&T Cook Enterprises failed to:

    • ensure the burner was refuelled in accordance with manufacturer’s operating instructions or otherwise in a safe manner
    • provide all workers with written instructions to refuel the burner in accordance with the manufacturer’s operating instructions or otherwise in a safe manner
    • train all workers to refuel the burner with the burner mouth closed, with use of the manufacturer’s jerry can, and with use of the manufacturer’s dedicated refuelling point
    • adequately train workers to require the ethanol burner to cool for at least 30 minutes before refuelling
    • supervise the refuelling of the burner.

    These failures exposed individuals to a risk of serious injury.

    As the business operator, Tiarne Cook failed to:

    • exercise due diligence to ensure that H&T Cook Enterprises complied with its health and safety duty
    • train the employee to refuel the burner without ensuring that the employee knew it should be refuelled only when completely cool, when shut off, and by use of the specialised jerry can through the dedicated refuelling point.

    These failures exposed individuals to a risk of serious injury.

    11 December 2020

  • S & AD Basheer Nominees Pty Ltd

    Marie Boland v S & AD Basheer Nominees Pty Ltd

    S & AD Basheer Nominees Pty Ltd have been convicted and fined a total of $70,000 plus legal fees after a contractor was injured when he fell into an open and unguarded cellar.

    The defendant, who own and operate the Strathmore Hotel in Adelaide, failed to provide and maintain a safe working environment at the Hotel, and to provide adequate information and training to its employees.

    Prior to the incident, the defendant engaged Murray Pest and Weed Control to perform pest eradication and control maintenance services at the Strathmore Hotel.

    In August 2013, a Murray’s contractor was injured when he fell through the open trapdoors of a cellar in the Hotel’s gaming room. The worker sustained a spleen laceration and required immediate treatment in hospital.

    The defendant entered a guilty plea in the South Australian Employment Tribunal (SAET) in September 2015.

    The SAET imposed a fine of $100,000, which was reduced by 30% to $70,000 for the defendant’s early guilty plea, demonstration of remorse and cooperation with SafeWork SA. In addition, a victim of crime levy, court costs and prosecution costs were ordered.

    The SAET considered that the offending was a serious breach of the WHS Act and deterrence was an important consideration in determining penalty.

    10 December 2019


    Anthony Rosier

    Martyn Campbell v Anthony Rosier

    Anthony Rosier was convicted and fined a total of $8,100 after pleading guilty to a breach of S43(1) of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA) and regulation 487(1) Work Health Safety Regulations (SA). In addition, prosecution costs and a victim of crime levy were also ordered.

    In November 2017, Rosier removed about 94m2 of asbestos containing material from a domestic dwelling without the necessary licencing to do so. He also failed to ensure that appropriate signage alerting the public to the presence of asbestos was put in place to indicate that this work was being carried out.

    The defendant entered a guilty plea in the South Australian Employment Tribunal (SAET) in November 2019.

    On 15 November 2019, the SAET imposed a conviction and the above penalty. The SAET remarked that the penalty took into account the seriousness of the offending, the defendant's significant prior offending regarding asbestos, the defendant's early guilty plea and the defendant's financial circumstances.

    15 November 2019


    Tad-Mar Electrical Pty Ltd

    Martyn Campbell v Tad-Mar Electrical Pty Ltd

    Tad-Mar Electrical Pty Ltd was convicted and fined $15,000 (after reduction of 40%) after pleading guilty to a breach of s33 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012(SA).

    On 25 March 2017, an apprentice engaged at the defendant’s electrical business was exposed to a risk to his safety when supervisors squirted flammable liquid onto the apprentice and ignited it.

    The defendant had a duty to ensure, as far as was reasonably practicable, the health and safety of its workers.

    In this case it failed to adequately train and supervise its site supervisors involved in the incident and it failed to ensure that it possessed and made known to all of its workers a documented bullying and harassment policy.

    The defendant was found guilty with the penalty given taking into account the defendant’s contrition, early plea and co-operation with the investigation, their acceptance of responsibility for its role in the incident and identifying the deficiency of bullying and harassment policies at the time and making considerable investment to ensure workers have an avenue to report bullying.

    13 November 2019


    Luke Chenoweth

    Martyn Campbell v Luke Chenoweth

    Luke Chenoweth was convicted and fined $21,000 (after reduction of 40%) after pleading guilty to a breach of s31 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA).

    On 25 March 2017 the defendant was a site supervisor employed by Tad-Mar Electrical Pty Ltd and was carrying out electrical work at a site in Woodville.

    Luke Chenoweth squirted a flammable liquid onto the boot, pants and shirt of an apprentice and ignited the flammable liquid.

    The defendant took no immediate steps to extinguish the flames on the apprentice’s shirt and his conduct made it possible for the apprentice to be killed or to sustain serious injuries from burns to his body.

    The defendant was found to be reckless as to the risk of death or serious injury to the apprentice.

    29 August 2019


    TC Formwork

    Martyn Campbell v TC Formwork Pty Ltd

    TC Formwork was convicted and fined $120,000 (after reduction of 40%) after pleading guilty to a breach of s32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA).

    On 6 December 2016 a worker at a Windsor Gardens site fell over an exposed edge of formwork from a height of 4.4 metres above the ground, fracturing his leg.

    Workers at the site were exposed to a risk of death or serious injury because no static line system or fall restraint system had been installed, and workers did not wear harnesses.

    21 August 2019


    Jeffrey Rowe

    Martyn Campbell v Jeffrey Rowe

    Jeffrey Rowe was convicted and fined $12,000 (after reduction of 40%) after pleading guilty to a breach of s31 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA).

    On 25 March 2017 the defendant was a site supervisor employed by Tad-Mar Electrical Pty Ltd and was carrying out electrical work at a site in Woodville.

    Another employee of Tad-Mar squirted a flammable liquid onto the boot and shirt of an apprentice and ignited the flammable liquid. The defendant took no steps to stop the actions of that employee. Instead the defendant squirted more flammable liquid onto the shirt of the apprentice whilst the shirt was burning.

    The defendant failed to take steps to stop the unsafe behaviour of the employee towards the apprentice, took no immediate steps to extinguish the flames on the apprentice’s shirt and was reckless as to the risk of death or serious injury to the apprentice.

    31 May 2019


    The State of South Australia (In the Right of South Australia Police)

    Martyn Campbell v The State of South Australia (In the Right of South Australia Police)

    SAPOL was convicted and fined $390,000 after pleading guilty to a breach of s32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA).

    On 4 October 2016 a cook was working alone at SAPOL’s Echunga training site. As part of her duties she entered a walk-in freezer to access food to be used in connection with training courses.

    Whilst she was inside the freezer door was blown shut and the emergency door release inside the freezer was not functioning properly. As a result the cook was trapped inside the freezer and succumbed to hypothermia.

    The defendant failed to provide and maintain, so far as was reasonably practicable, a safe work environment, safe plant at the site (being the freezer) as well as suitable and adequate information, training, instruction or supervision to the cook at the site.

    16 April 2019

  • Simec Zen Technologies (Power and Energy) Pty Ltd

    Martyn Campbell v Simec Zen Technologies (Power and Energy) Pty Ltd

    Zen Technologies were convicted and fined $114,000 (after reduction of 40%) after pleading guilty to a breach of s 19 and s32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA).

    On 31 March 2016 two workers attended the premises of Wohlers in Tanunda to measure energy consumption and make an assessment as to a suitable energy storage system with a view to Wohlers going off grid.

    While attaching power analyser test equipment to a live electricity board at the premises to record electrical consumption, an electrical arc occurred injuring a worker. One worker suffered burns to hands, arms and face while the second worker escaped injury.

    The defendant failed to have in place adequate hazard identification and risk assessment processes and adequate documented safe work procedures in relation to the use of a power analyser to measure electricity consumption.

    31 October 2018


    Pro-Pac Packaging (Aust) Pty Ltd

    Pro-Pac Packaging (Aust) Pty Ltd were charged with breaches of s32 (as read with s19) of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA). On 1 June 2015 a worker sustained serious injuries to his lower leg when he was struck by a moving forklift driven by a co-worker.

    The defendant failed to ensure, so far as was reasonably practicable, the provision and maintenance of a safe system of work in relation to the task which minimised the risk of pedestrians coming into contact with a moving forklift in the area at the site where the task was performed.

    13 July 2018


    Jarrad MacGillvary Pty Ltd and Callan MacGillvary Pty Ltd

    Campbell v Jarrad MacGillvary Pty Ltd and Callan MacGillvary Pty Ltd

    Jarrad MacGillvary Pty Ltd and Callan MacGillvary Pty Ltd were convicted and fined $105,000 each after pleading guilty to a breach of s32 (as read with s19) of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA). Compensation totalling $50,000 (5 x $10,000) was ordered to be paid to the worker’s family. On 9 August 2016, a 17 year old carpentry apprentice was killed when a 13 metre section of propped timber framing fell over striking the worker in the head and chest causing fatal crush injuries.

    The defendants failed to ensure to that their workers used a system of work which minimised the risk of timber framework falling by:

    • requiring all props used as temporary bracing to be nail-fixed at the top of a stud or top plate of the wall frame; and
    • adequately secured at the base to the slab, the ground or some other immovable object.

    11 May 2018


    Boland V JT Johnson and Sons Pty Ltd

    JT Johnson and Sons Pty Ltd were found guilty at trial for breaches of section 19(1) of the Occupational Health Safety and Welfare Act 1986. The company was convicted and fined $225,000. On 9 October 2012, an employee was crushed in the door of an item of plant while accessing the machine to perform maintenance work.

    The defendant failed to provide and maintain, so far as was reasonably practicable:

    • plant in a safe condition, in that it failed to prevent or minimize the risk of injury arising from the right hand side door closing
    • a safe system of work in that it failed to develop and implement a safe operating procedure (or procedures) which specified the access and egress point and procedures to be followed in respect of maintenance to be carried out and prohibited the use of the right hand side door as a point of access to, or egress from the machine.

    15 March 2018


    Laszlo Bajtek

    Soulio v Laszlo Bajtek

    Laszlo Bajtek was convicted after pleading guilty to sections 19 and 32 of the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 (SA). The charges relate to a workplace incident which occurred on the 1 June 2015 when a worker was seriously injured by a moving forklift.

    The defendant failed to:

    • comply with his health and safety duty prescribed by s19 (1) of the Act because he failed to ensure, so far as was reasonably practicable, the provision and maintenance of a safe system of work in relation to the task which minimised the risk [of] pedestrians coming into contact with a moving forklift in the area at the site where the task was performed, being an adequate traffic management system which prohibited the use of forklifts in the area where the task was performed
    • comply with his health and safety duty prescribed by s19(1) of the Act because he failed to ensure, so far as was reasonably practicable, the provision of information, training and instruction or supervision that was necessary to protect the worker from risks to his health and safety arising from the performance of the task at the site.

    Given the defendants inability to pay, Magistrate Ardlie proceeded under the provisions of s13 of the Criminal Law (Sentencing) Act 1988.

    The penalty imposed if the defendant was in a position to pay is $120,000 reduced by 20% to $96,000 for the guilty plea.

    2 March 2018

  • Exemptions

    Exemptions under the Act from prosecution for certain duty of care offences are:

    • volunteers (unless they failed to comply with a duty applicable to a worker or other person in the workplace)
    • unincorporated associations (however officers or members of an unincorporated association may be liable for a failure to comply with a duty)
    • Ministers of the Crown and an elected member of a local authority.