Roads and Maritime Services v Troy Heavy Haulage Pty Ltd [2013] NSWLC 21

Local Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Roads and Maritime Services v Troy Heavy Haulage Pty Ltd [2013] NSWLC 21 Hearing dates: 25/07/2013, 13/09/2013 Decision date: 10 October 2013 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Huntsman LCM Decision: Catchwords: ROAD TRANSPORT - breaches of mass, dimension and load restraint requirements - severe risk breach - exemptions by permits and notices - large indivisible item - container designed for multi-modal travel - container weight declaration - reasonable steps defence Legislation Cited: Roads Act 1993 Road Transport (General) Act 2005 Road Transport (Mass, Loading and Access) Regulation 2005 Road Transport (Vehicle Registration) Regulation 2007 Cases Cited: John Tilman v Daromin Engineering Pty Ltd (NSWSC, unreported, Dowd J, 6/11/2000) Category: Principal judgment Parties: Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) Troy Heavy Haulage Pty Ltd (Defendant) Representation: Mr Ilkovski (for the Defendant) Ms Tiedt (for the RMS) File Number(s): 2013/971717

Judgment

Background 1The Defendant, Troy Heavy Haulage Pty Ltd, is charged with three offences under section 56 of the Road Transport (General) Act 2005 (the Act), the applicable legislation on the date of the alleged offences. The Defendant is charged as the operator of the heavy vehicle. In summary, it is alleged that the Defendant's vehicle was in breach of mass, dimension and load restraint requirements. 2On the date of the offences, the Defendant's heavy vehicle collected a shipping container at Botany, which had just cleared quarantine. The weight and size of the container was noted by staff at the Defendant's office, and one of the Defendant's drivers was directed to collect the container. The shipping container was packed with a load of five forklift machines, forks and masts. 3It is alleged that on 21 September 2012, at 1.40pm, the Defendant's vehicle was being driven in breach of: (1)Mass requirement; (2)Dimension requirement; (3)Load restraint requirement. 4The details, alleged by the prosecution, include that the quad axle group mass exceeded 20.00 tonnes. The prosecution states that the mass on the quad axle group was measured at 32.15 tonnes, which exceeded the allowed mass by 12.15 tonnes, or 60.75%, and was categorised as a "severe risk" breach. 5The dimension requirement was that the length of the vehicle could not exceed 19 metres. The length of the vehicle was measured at 21.05 metres, which exceeded the allowed length by 1.05m, and was characterised as a "severe risk" breach. 6The load restraint requirement was that an appropriate method must be used to restrain the load on a vehicle, and the Inspector from Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) determined the method of load restraint was inappropriate, and was characterised as a "severe risk" breach.