NSW Caselaw
Industrial Court of New South Wales
CITATION: WorkCover Authority of New South Wales (Inspector Belley) v Steven Carl Akerman [2006] NSWIRComm 353
PROSECUTOR: WorkCover Authority of New South Wales (Inspector Belley) PARTIES: DEFENDANT: Steven Carl Akerman
FILE NUMBER(S): IRC 5606 of 2005
CORAM: Staunton J
CATCHWORDS: Occupational health and safety - no appearance by defendant - other co-defendants have entered pleas of guilty to their respective offences arising from same factual matrix - defendant resides in United States of America - application to proceed ex parte - provisions of s 250 of the Criminal Procedure Act applied - Rule 112 of Industrial Relations Commission Rules dealing with service of originating process outside of Australia also considered - leave granted to proceed against defendant on ex parte basis - determined that defendant was properly served - determined that the defendant was at the relevant time a director of the corporate defendant who has entered plea of guilty under s 10(2) - defendant held to have contravened same provisions by virtue of s 26(1) - determined the substantive offence established - determined that the defendant is unable to rely on the statutory defences provided in s 26(1)(a) or (b) of the Act - offence proved.
LEGISLATION CITED: Criminal Procedure Act 1986 Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000
HEARING DATES: 6/11/2006
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 11/24/2006
PROESCUTION: Mr R Reitano of counsel SOLICITORS: LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: Criminal Law Practice Legal Group
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate