NSW Caselaw
Industrial Court of New South Wales
CITATION: Inspector Robert Alan Sealey (WorkCover Authority of New South Wales) v Toll Pty Ltd [2006] NSWIRComm 296
PROSECUTOR: Inspector Robert Alan Sealey (WorkCover Authority of New South Wales) PARTIES: DEFENDANT: Toll Pty Ltd
FILE NUMBER(S): IRC 6644 of 2005
CORAM: Haylen J
CATCHWORDS: Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 - s 8(1) - guilty plea - transport industry - loading of frozen goods in congested loading bay - forklift unable to be parked safely and away from person loading trailer - loading mechanism activated causing forklift to slide resulting in severe crush injuries to employee - previous conviction - serious breach established - comprehensive failure of otherwise substantial safety system - general and specific deterrence - early plea - considerable subjective factors - penalty imposed
HEARING DATES: 08/09/2006
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 09/13/2006
PROSECUTOR: Mr P Skinner of counsel SOLICITORS: Moray & Agnew LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES:
DEFENDANT: Mr A Moses of counsel SOLICITORS: Clayton Utz
JUDGMENT:
INDUSTRIAL COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES CORAM: Haylen J 13 September 2006
Matter No IRC 6644 of 2005 INSPECTOR ROBERT ALAN SEALEY (WORKCOVER AUTHORITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES) v TOLL PTY LTD Prosecution under s 8(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 JUDGMENT [2006] NSWIRComm 296
1 On 22 December 2003, Mr David Price was employed by Toll Pty Ltd as a yardman/driver to work at the premises of Clelands Storage and Distribution Pty Ltd situated at Moondo Street, Greenacre. Mr Price's duties included assisting in the loading and unloading of trucks operated by Toll Pty Ltd. On this day, while performing those duties, Mr Price was pinned by a forklift against the rear door of a truck in the loading bay. He received significant crush injuries and was admitted to Liverpool Hospital for treatment. 2 After investigating this accident, proceedings were commenced against Toll Pty Ltd alleging a breach of s 8(1) of Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000. The company, after taking time to consider its position, entered a plea of guilty to an Amended Application for Order. This decision deals with the evidence and submissions put before the Court on the sentence hearing. 3 The Amended Application for Order identified and particularised the breach in the following terms: There was a failure to ensure that systems of work and the working environment of the company's employees were safe and without risk to health in relation to the work being conducted by it at the premises, work specifically related to the docking, unloading, loading and despatching of freight by reason that:
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